Greenpease East Asia - Press Releaseshttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/This RSS feed contains all the press releases about Greenpeace East Asia.en-cn(c) 2016, GreenpeaceSat, 10 Dec 2016 04:04:12 +01005climate & energy/food & agriculture/forests/oceans/other issues/toxicsa19a93d2-85ea-4503-aa28-796dde483733http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/nNHANCkn3nM/China’s Power Sector 13th Five Year Plan disappoints - GreenpeaceBeijing, 7 November 2016 - China’s Power Sector 13th Five Year Plan, released today by the National Energy Administration, is far from ambitious enough in its attempts to tackle China’s coal power overcapacity problem.[1] In addition, its wind power capacity targets do not reflect the reality of the sector’s growth and solar targets fail to expand the sector beyond its record 2015 growth.<p dir="ltr"><span>“The plan announced today fails to provide the much-needed blueprint for cleaning up China’s power industry,” said Greenpeace senior coal campaigner Lauri Myllyvirta.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>“Over the last three years China has seen coal consumption peak and record wind and solar installations. While the new plan consolidates many of these accomplishments, it does little to increase ambition.”</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>The plan limits coal-fired power generating capacity to 1,100 gigawatts in 2020, up from the current capacity of 920GW. Given that China already has severe overcapacity and demand for coal-fired power generation continues to fall, this is disappointing.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>With 200GW of coal-fired power plants already under construction, the plan will still require entirely stopping new projects from going into construction and retiring existing capacity or cancelling some under-construction projects. However, these measures do not show the same level of ambition as policies announced by the country’s energy regulator in September and October this year, which saw the cancellation of dozens of under-construction projects with a combined capacity of 17GW.[2]</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>The plan’s wind and solar targets are also disappointing. The wind energy target of “more than 210GW” will be exceeded by a significant margin. China already has a total of 140GW wind power in operation and a further 80GW under construction. Setting a low target will create uncertainty for new projects.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>The solar power target is somewhat more ambitious, keeping annual installations at the record level achieved in 2015. However, given the urgency of combating air pollution and climate change, we would expect the government to accelerate investments in clean energy, rather than stabilise or slow down.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Greenpeace is calling on the government to limit coal-fired capacity in 2020 at or below current level, by cancelling the vast glut of coal-fired power plants permitted in 2015, and accelerating retirements of existing coal plants. Investments in renewable energy should be further accelerated from 2015 levels to continue to reduce China’s CO2 emissions in line with what is required to combat climate change.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>Notes to editors:</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>[1] </span><a href="http://www.nea.gov.cn/xwfb/20161107zb1/index.htm" target="_blank" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?hl=en&amp;q=http://www.nea.gov.cn/xwfb/20161107zb1/index.htm&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1478594996168000&amp;usg=AFQjCNHyg_E6hcvGa-sXoLZvSdwt-e2MGw"><span>http://www.nea.gov.cn/xwfb/20161107zb1/index.htm</span></a></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>[2] </span><span><a href="http://energydesk.greenpeace.org/series/china-energy/" target="_blank" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?hl=en&amp;q=http://energydesk.greenpeace.org/series/china-energy/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1478594996168000&amp;usg=AFQjCNEdLWuHXm4mAS-Z68rT12YAFNBP4g">http://energydesk.greenpeace.org/series/china-energy/</a></span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span><strong>Media Contacts:</strong></span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Tom Baxter, International Communications Officer, Greenpeace East Asia, email: <a href="mailto:tom.baxter@greenpeace.org" target="_blank">tom.baxter@greenpeace.org</a> phone: <a href="tel:%2B86%2018811344861" target="_blank">+86 18811344861</a></span>&nbsp;</p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span><span>Lauri Myllyvirta, Senior Coal Campaigner, Greenpeace, email: </span><span style="color: #000000; font-family: arial;"><span><a href="mailto:lauri.myllyvirta@greenpeace.org" target="_blank">lauri.myllyvirta@greenpeace.org</a> phone: </span></span><a href="tel:%2B86%20157%201002%201563" target="_blank">+86 157 1002 1563</a><span style="color: #000000; font-family: arial;"><span> Greenpeace International Press Desk, <a href="mailto:pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org" target="_blank">pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org</a>, phone: <a href="tel:%2B31%20%280%29%2020%207182470" target="_blank">+31 (0) 20 7182470</a> (available 24 hours)</span></span></span></p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/nNHANCkn3nM" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Mon, 07 Nov 2016 08:54:00 +0100climate & energyamcgurkhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/climate-energy/2016/China-Power-135YP/c90a301b-e9b1-4189-92bc-8099e012d7aahttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/fWhx4XgXEg0/Dumping 4.3 million Samsung phones is an environmental disaster warns GreenpeaceSeoul, 1 November 2016 - Samsung’s lack of transparency on the disposal of Galaxy Note 7 leaves tonnes of precious minerals at risk of being discarded into the environment. According to calculations by Oeko-Institut, a research and consultancy institution based in Germany, 4.3 million smartphones contain more than 20 metric tonnes of Cobalt, approximately more than 1 tonne of tungsten, 1 tonne of silver, 100 kilograms of gold and between 20 and 60 kilograms of palladium. <p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>These materials could be recovered but would instead</span><span> end up harming the environment if Samsung doesn’t repurpose or reuse these precious minerals.</span></p><p></p><div dir="ltr">Samsung has yet to make an official statement fully explaining the causes of the fault, despite a global recall of the Galaxy Note 7 and offering replacements. It has said that it will not recycle the phones and has still not offered any clarity on what it will do with the returned phones.</div><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>“Samsung now has an opportunity to set an example to the industry: will it recover and reuse the precious metals </span><span>and other valuable materials </span><span>in these 4.3 million devices and avoid an environmental disaster or will it simply dump them?” said Jude Lee, </span><span>Senior IT Campaigner at Greenpeace East Asia. </span><span>“We are launching a global petition challenging Samsung to not dump the phones and instead take this chance to totally rethink how it designs and produces its products.”</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Millions of phones were recalled worldwide after a number of high profile cases of exploding Samsung Galaxy Note 7 devices. </span><span>&nbsp;In April 2016, Samsung expected to sell 14 million &nbsp;Galaxy Note 7 devices within the first two months since its official launch.</span><span> </span><a href="http://m.news.naver.com/read.nhn?mode=LSD&amp;sid1=001&amp;oid=036&amp;aid=0000037175"><span>Samsung has currently produced 4.3 million devices</span></a><span> and sold 1.8 million in more than 10 countries including South Korea, USA, Canada, M</span><span>exico, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore, Taiwan, United Arab Emirates, and China.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>In the USA - the country with the highest amount of phones sold with a total of 1 million - Samsung mentioned that their existing mobile takeback programme does not apply to </span><span>the </span><span>Galaxy Note 7, but has not stated how they will deal with the phones, or whether the phones will go through recycling or smelting progr</span><span>ams.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>The Galaxy Note 7 incident reflects the disposable economic model of many smartphone manufacturers and is having a negative impact on the brand’s reputation. </span><span>Dumping millions of phones also raises the issue of Samsung’s transparency and claims to support a ‘circular economy’, and of the responsibility associated with resource efficiency.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>In 1995, following a defect in its newly produced Anycall phones, Samsung disposed of 150,000 phones and set them on fire. Greenpeace urges Samsung to step up and use this crisis as an opportunity to adopt a more forward-thinking approach.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>“This incident shows how fragile and wasteful our current system of production is - a system that hasn’t changed since the industrial revolution. Samsung has an opportunity to rethink its production model - one that would improve recovery of precious metals and rare earth minerals, to design products that can be more easily repaired, recycled or reused,” said Lee.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>In August, Greenpeace East Asia released results of a consumer survey which found that many people believed that phone manufacturers should be responsible for providing people with the means to recycle their phones. </span><span>Over half of respondents across the countries surveyed agree that manufacturers are releasing too many new models every year.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Greenpeace is calling on Samsung to not dump or burn the devices and </span><span>minimise the environmental impact by </span><span>finding alternative ways to reuse the resources. It must also b</span><span>e transparent and publish its plan on how it intends to deal with dismantling and disposing these phones.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>Notes to editors:</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>[1] More information on calculations and methodology by the Oeko-Institut- &nbsp;</span><a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/Global/eastasia/publications/campaigns/Toxics%202016/Galaxy%20Factsheet%20-%20FINAL%20.pdf"><span>available here</span></a><span>.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>[2] 4.3 million smartphones refers to calculations presented in South Korean media: </span><span><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span>From August 19 launch until the first global recall on 2 September, 2.5 million Note 7 phones were produced (1.5 million were sold). After the first recall, 1.5 million further replacement products were produced. Samsung sold a further 0.2 million devices in China after the first global recall (the country was not included in the recall as the batteries were sourced elsewhere). The company also sold a further 0.1 </span><span><br class="kix-line-break" /></span><span>million more in Korea from October 1 after resuming sales</span><span>.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span> </span><a href="http://www.hankyung.com/news/app/newsview.php?aid=2016101161201"><span>http://www.hankyung.com/news/app/newsview.php?aid=2016101161201</span></a><span> </span><span><a href="http://www.newsis.com/ar_detail/view.html?ar_id=NISX20161011_0014441331&amp;cID=10401&amp;pID=10400">http://www.newsis.com/ar_detail/view.html?ar_id=NISX20161011_0014441331&amp;cID=10401&amp;pID=10400</a></span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>[3] “Nearly half of consumers say manufacturers should be responsible for recycling mobile phones” - </span><span><a href="https://p3-admin.greenpeace.org/international/en/press/releases/2016/Nearly-half-of-consumers-think-manufacturers-should-be-responsible-for-recycling-mobile-phones/">Greenpeace International press release</a></span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>Media contacts:</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Maria Elena De Matteo, Global Communications Strategist, Greenpeace East Asia, mariaelena.dematteo@greenpeace.org, phone +852 9584 7425</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Greenpeace International Press Desk, pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org, phone: +31 (0) 20 718 2470 (available 24 hours)</span></p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/fWhx4XgXEg0" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Tue, 01 Nov 2016 06:30:00 +0100toxicsamcgurkhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/toxics/2016/samsung-phones/94c95d9c-7f7a-4355-b21d-5deb607dfabehttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/XwX0sIqo2ak/Xi’an Environmental Protection Bureau caught tampering with air quality readings - Greenpeace responseBeijing, 25 October 2016 - It is shocking and concerning that the Xi'an Environmental Protection Bureau has consistently falsified air quality readings.[1]<p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>“Citizens have a right to know about the quality of the air they breath, in order to protect their and their family's health,” said Greenpeace East Asia climate and energy campaigner Dong Liansai. “Reliable data is the very starting point of China’s ‘war on pollution’.”</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>China’s Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP) has previously promised to crack down on false air quality readings [2], and a system to establish the validity of air quality readings is in place.[3] In June 2015, the MEP reported seven cases of falsification of air quality data.[4]</span></p><p></p><div dir="ltr">The Xi'an scandal should not detract from the overall long-term trend of air quality improvements across China, however. Previous analysis by Greenpeace East Asia of NASA satellite imagery has corroborated the overall national improvement in air quality in the last two years.</div><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Under the central government’s </span><span>Air Pollution Prevention Control Action Plan </span><span>every province has agreed to meet specific air quality targets.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>“Today’s news should serve as a warning to officials around the country that the central government is serious about punishing environmental abuses.”</span></p><p></p><p><span id="docs-internal-guid-9340d491-fa96-9c17-cb57-84a0e3534127"><span>The MEP must continue to investigate such cases of falsified readings and ensure that local governments fully implement central government policy and provide their citizens with the information needed to safeguard their health.</span></span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Notes to editors:</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>[1] </span><a href="http://m.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_1548809?from=singlemessage&amp;isappinstalled=0"><span>http://m.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_1548809</span></a><span> </span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>[2] </span><a href="https://www.chinadialogue.net/blog/7828-China-promises-crackdown-on-fake-air-quality-data/en"><span>https://www.chinadialogue.net/blog/7828-China-promises-crackdown-on-fake-air-quality-data/en</span></a></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>[3] Measures include simultaneous disclosures in multiple platform, remote monitoring and auto-report, cross-examination by different provinces and random spot-checks.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>[4] </span><a href="http://www.mep.gov.cn/gkml/hbb/qt/201506/t20150612_303415.htm"><span>http://www.mep.gov.cn/gkml/hbb/qt/201506/t20150612_303415.htm</span></a></p><p></p><div dir="ltr">Media contacts:</div><p></p><p>Tom Baxter, International Communications Officer, Greenpeace East Asia, email: tom.baxter@greenpeace.org phone: +86 18811344861</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace International Press Desk, email: pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org, phone: +31 (0) 20 718 2470 (available 24 hours)</p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/XwX0sIqo2ak" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Tue, 25 Oct 2016 06:41:00 +0200climate & energytbaxterhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/climate-energy/2016/Xian-Environmental-Protection-Bureau-caught-tampering-with-air-quality-readings---Greenpeace-response/888298e3-022c-4b30-882a-48fe42500887http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/9BQCOEFT3aE/Greenpeace finds microplastics in all 5 leading cosmetic retailers : inadequate labelling found in almost 50% of productsHong Kong, October 12 2016 - A crowdsourcing investigation by Greenpeace East Asia in Hong Kong, has found five leading cosmetics retailers selling products with microplastics, which has increasingly been proven to be damaging to the environment as well as failing to provide clear ingredient labelling on their products. Almost 1,500 products were surveyed in Bonjour, Colourmix, Mannings, Sasa and Watsons and nearly 50% of the products were found to not have clear ingredient labelling. For the products that had clear labelling, close to 40% of them contained microplastics.<p dir="ltr">Greenpeace Senior Campaigner Kate Lin said that whilst it is a common belief that only facial cleansers and scrubs contain microplastics, they are actually more commonly found in cosmetics.</p><p></p><p>“This crowdsourcing research discovered that a lot of makeup products such as eyeshadow, foundation, and lipstick also contain microplastics. These microplastics are smaller and more difficult to remove, and thus pose a greater pollution threat to our oceans,” says Lin. “What’s even more concerning is that the vast majority of brands and retailers do not properly monitor microplastics in their leave-on products nor do they have any plan to phase them out.”</p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Prior to the crowdsourcing research, Greenpeace East Asia in Hong Kong had asked the five retailers to explain their policies on microplastics (refer to Table 2). Apart from Colourmix, all retailers responded and said they had policies in place to deal with the microplastics issue. However, &nbsp;only Sasa provided a full public commitment, whilst Mannings and Watsons said they only had a plan to phase out the use of microplastics in their own branded products and would continue to sell other brands that contained microplastics. Mannings did not publicly disclose the details of its microplastics policy, meaning there is a lack of public oversight. Furthermore, the responded companies are only targeting rinse-off products in their microplastics policies, overlooking leave-on products entirely, such as cosmetics and sunscreen products.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>“Since half of their products are not clearly labelled, it's very easy for the customer to mistakenly buy a product with microplastics,” says Lin. “A conscientious retailer must not only ensure that the products they are selling do not contain microplastics but also provide more product information to give consumers peace of mind when they shop at their stores.”</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Microplastic pollution has become a global concern in the past few years, with research showing they not only pollute our oceans, but also harm marine animals and impact human health. Medical research has proven that materials smaller than 100 nanometres can be absorbed by skin cells, which leads to a more direct threat to the human body.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>In July, Greenpeace published a report </span><span>Plastics in Seafood,</span><span> which found microplastic debris in the bodies of as many as 170 different species of marine animals. It is also possible for microplastics to absorb toxic pollutants in the ocean, and if a marine species accidentally ingests these microplastics these poisons then enter the food chain which increase the risk of harming humans. Several global brands have promised to phase out the use of microplastics in their products; the US introduced legislation in 2015 banning microplastics in cosmetics and personal care products; and, Taiwan, South Korea and others have also said they will introduce similar laws soon. However, Hong Kong has no such law or policy.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Greenpeace East Asia is calling on retailers in Hong Kong to halt all sales of microplastics in their stores by ensuring they stop using microplastics in both their branded products and cease stocking other brands that contain microplastics. Before that process is complete, they should make every effort to be as transparent as possible about the information they provide to customers. The Hong Kong government also needs to urgently enact legislation to ban the use of microplastics in cosmetics and personal care products, and amend the law to force companies to clearly label all their products so the public can make an informed choice. As consumers, we should avoid buying microplastics by consulting the list of microplastic names provided on Greenpeace's website, and add their voice to our petition calling on these big retailers to stop manufacturing and selling products that contain microplastics.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>Notes to Editors:</strong></p><p></p><ol><p></p><li dir="ltr"><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Our “microplastics crowdsourcing team” consisted of 40 volunteers. They examined 1,413 products, of which 726 were rinse-off cleansers for face and body and 687 were leave-on products, such as cosmetics and sunscreen. They found evidence of microplastics</span><span> in 37.5% of the products (219 items), of which 37 were rinse-off and 182 were leave-on products (refer to Table 1). Furthermore, almost half of the products (698 items) did not list their ingredients, or were listed in a language not commonly used in Hong Kong, such as Japanese or Korean</span></p><p></p></li><p></p></ol><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Table 1：Percentage of products found in 5 retailer stores with microplastics or without clear labels</span></p><p></p><div dir="ltr"><p></p><table><colgroup><col width="105" /><col width="94" /><col width="124" /><col width="154" /><col width="124" /></colgroup><p></p><tbody><p></p><tr><p></p><td>&nbsp;</td><p></p><td>&nbsp;</td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Total number of surveyed products by category</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Percentage of products containing microplastics* (Quantity)</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Percentage of products with no clear labelling** (Quantity)</span></p><p></p></td><p></p></tr><p></p><tr><p></p><td rowspan="3"><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Rinse-off products</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Face cleansing products</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>550</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>10.9% (29)</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>51.8% (285)</span></p><p></p></td><p></p></tr><p></p><tr><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Body cleansing products</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>78</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>17.0% (8)</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>39.7% (31)</span></p><p></p></td><p></p></tr><p></p><tr><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Hair cleansing products</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>98</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>0% (0)</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>84.7% (83)</span></p><p></p></td><p></p></tr><p></p><tr><p></p><td rowspan="6"><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Leave-on products</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Face cosmetics</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>220</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>77.3% (68)</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>60.0% (132)</span></p><p></p></td><p></p></tr><p></p><tr><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Eye cosmetics</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>167</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>79.4% (50)</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>62.3% (104)</span></p><p></p></td><p></p></tr><p></p><tr><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Lip cosmetics</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>105</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>84.3% (43)</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>51.4% (54)</span></p><p></p></td><p></p></tr><p></p><tr><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Sunscreen</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>115</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>38.3% (18)</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>59.1% (68)</span></p><p></p></td><p></p></tr><p></p><tr><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Hair products</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>71</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>25% (1)</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>94.4% (67)</span></p><p></p></td><p></p></tr><p></p><tr><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Others</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>9</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>50% (2)</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>55.6% (5)</span></p><p></p></td><p></p></tr><p></p></tbody><p></p></table><p></p></div><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>* The percentage is calculated based on the products that have a clear ingredient labelling</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>** The percentage is calculated based on the products that Greenpeace had investigated</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Table 2：Microplastic policies of the 5 retailers</span></p><p></p><div dir="ltr"><p></p><table><colgroup><col width="85" /><col width="155" /><col width="*" /><col width="*" /><col width="*" /></colgroup><p></p><tbody><p></p><tr><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Bonjour</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td colspan="4"><p></p><ul><p></p><li dir="ltr"><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>All private brands products will stop containing microplastics from 30 June 2017</span></p><p></p></li><p></p><li dir="ltr"><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Includes non-private brands products, but does not indicate a clear timeline</span></p><p></p></li><p></p><li dir="ltr"><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Does not include leave-on products</span></p><p></p></li><p></p></ul><p></p></td><p></p></tr><p></p><tr><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Colourmix</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td colspan="4"><p></p><ul><p></p><li dir="ltr"><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>No response</span></p><p></p></li><p></p><li dir="ltr"><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>No public available information </span></p><p></p></li><p></p></ul><p></p></td><p></p></tr><p></p><tr><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Mannings</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td colspan="4"><p></p><ul><p></p><li dir="ltr"><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>All private brands products will stop containing microplastics from 1 March 2017</span></p><p></p></li><p></p><li dir="ltr"><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Does not include non-private brands products</span></p><p></p></li><p></p><li dir="ltr"><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Does not include leave-on products</span></p><p></p></li><p></p><li dir="ltr"><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Applicable in HK market only</span></p><p></p></li><p></p></ul><p></p></td><p></p></tr><p></p><tr><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Sasa</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td colspan="4"><p></p><ul><p></p><li dir="ltr"><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>All private and non-private brands products will stop containing microplastics by 31 December 2018</span></p><p></p></li><p></p><li dir="ltr"><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Does not include leave-on products</span></p><p></p></li><p></p></ul><p></p></td><p></p></tr><p></p><tr><p></p><td><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Watsons</span></p><p></p></td><p></p><td colspan="4"><p></p><ul><p></p><li dir="ltr"><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>All private brands products will stop containing microplastics from 1 September 2016 for HK market and from 1 January 2017 for other markets</span></p><p></p></li><p></p><li dir="ltr"><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Does not include non-private brands products</span></p><p></p></li><p></p><li dir="ltr"><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Does not include leave-on products</span></p><p></p></li><p></p></ul><p></p></td><p></p></tr><p></p></tbody><p></p></table><p></p></div><p></p><p><span><span>&nbsp;</span></span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Photos </span><span>：</span><a href="http://bit.ly/2dLgybA"><span>http://bit.ly/2dLgybA</span></a><span> </span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Petition link</span><a href="http://bit.ly/2cGjYud"><span>：</span></a><a href="http://bit.ly/2e3ZEYJ"><span>http://bit.ly/2e3ZEYJ</span></a><span> </span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>List of microplastic products sold in 5 retailers stores：</span><span><a href="https://secured.greenpeace.org/hk/campaigns/oceans/product-list/">https://secured.greenpeace.org/hk/campaigns/oceans/product-list/</a></span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>Media Contacts：</strong><span><br class="kix-line-break" /></span></p><p></p><p>Kate, Lin Pui Yi<br />Senior Campaigner, Greenpeace<br />Tel：2854 8309 / 9234 8312<br />Email：kate.lin@greenpeace.org</p><p></p><p>Bonnie Tang<br />Campaigner, Greenpeace<br />Tel：2854 8371 / 9256 4633<br />Email：bonnie.tang@greenpeace.org</p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/9BQCOEFT3aE" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Thu, 13 Oct 2016 07:18:00 +0200oceansamcgurkhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/oceans/2016/Greenpeace-finds-microplastics-in-all-5-leading-cosmetic-retailers--Inadequate-labelling-found-in-almost-50-of-products/531b83f2-49e4-424f-8275-fcff1b92e53chttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/G0s9HBFFfHE/China averaged 29 chemical accidents per month so far this year - GreenpeaceBeijing, 21 September, 2016 - 232 chemical-related accidents occurred in China from January to August 2016, an average of 29 per month, according to Greenpeace East Asia’s ‘Chemical Accident Counter’. The accidents caused 199 deaths and 400 injuries. The findings demonstrate the lax management of China’s chemicals industry, the world’s largest. In addition, preliminary findings from Greenpeace East Asia’s chemicals industry distribution mapping shows a worrying correlation of facility location and population density, as well as proximity to ecologically sensitive areas. Greenpeace calls on the Chinese government to radically overhaul the current chemicals management system and introduce greater transparency.<p dir="ltr"><span>“China's chemicals industry is the largest in the world, but it is appallingly under-regulated,” said Greenpeace East Asia toxics Assistant Manager Cheng Qian.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>“Tragic accidents occur on an almost daily basis. The government must take urgent action to manage chemicals in a sound manner, provide a safety net for workers and citizens, and protect ecologically important areas across the country.”</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Greenpeace East Asia’s Accident Counter compiles publicly available information on chemical accidents from the official websites of the State Administration of Work Safety and the China Chemical Safety Association, supplemented by monitoring of news sources. [1] The data is not exhaustive and it is more than likely that more accidents than those recorded in the above sources have occurred.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Analysis of the data set shows that 43% of accidents occur due to leaks, while fire and explosions account for 27% and 16% of accidents, respectively. The data also shows that 52% of accidents occur during transportation of chemicals, while 27% occur during production. [2]</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Using GIS mapping technology and the latest available data on 33,625 chemical facilities, Greenpeace can also show that the majority of chemical facilities in China are concentrated in the densely populated east.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>The mapping shows that nearly 84% of facilities are located outside of State Council’s 60 designated ‘priority counties for safety production management’. Nearly 18% of facilities are located in core ecological space [3]</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>The mapping relies on publicly accessible data from 2010-11. The fact that the latest data on chemical facilities’ locations is over five years old highlights the lack of transparency in the industry. The next stage of the mapping will enable the updating of this data set via user participation and public oversight.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>“Introducing transparency and public scrutiny to the industry is the first step towards safety,” said Cheng Qian.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Greenpeace urges the Ministry of Environmental Protection and the State Administration of Work Safety to improve transparency in China’s chemical industry. Chemicals management policy must be thoroughly reformed and recognise the intrinsic hazards of chemicals to ensure not only production safety, but also health and environmental safety. In addition, chemicals facilities should be moved away from urban and environmentally sensitive areas in order to minimise risk and hazardous chemicals should gradually be replaced with safe alternatives.</span></p><p></p><p><strong>Notes to editors:</strong></p><p></p><p>[1] For a full list of data sources, see infographic <a href="https://secured-static.greenpeace.org/eastasia/Global/eastasia/publications/reports/toxics/2016/China%20Chemical%20Accidents%20Counter%20-%20GPEA.pdf" target="_blank">here</a><br />[2] For a full analysis of GPEA’s chemicals accident counter data, see infographic <a href="https://secured-static.greenpeace.org/eastasia/Global/eastasia/publications/reports/toxics/2016/China%20Chemical%20Accidents%20Counter%20-%20GPEA.pdf" target="_blank">here</a><br />[3] A Spatial Distribution Mapping of China’s Chemicals Industry - Greenpeace East Asia Media Briefing available <a title="https://secured-static.greenpeace.org/eastasia/Global/eastasia/publications/reports/toxics/2016/A%20Spatial%20Distribution%20Mapping%20of%20China%E2%80%99s%20Chemicals%20Industry%20-%20GPEA%20media%20briefing.pdf" href="https://secured-static.greenpeace.org/eastasia/Global/eastasia/publications/reports/toxics/2016/A%20Spatial%20Distribution%20Mapping%20of%20China%E2%80%99s%20Chemicals%20Industry%20-%20GPEA%20media%20briefing.pdf" target="_blank">here</a></p><p></p><p><strong>Media contacts:</strong></p><p></p><p>Tom Baxter, International Communications Officer, Greenpeace East Asia, email: tom.baxter@greenpeace.org phone: +86 18811344861</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace International Press Desk, pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org, phone: +31 (0) 20 718 2470 (available 24 hours)</p><p></p><p><span><span><br /><br /></span></span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>&nbsp;</span></p><p></p><p><span>&nbsp;</span></p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/G0s9HBFFfHE" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Wed, 21 Sep 2016 02:16:00 +0200toxicsTom Baxterhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/toxics/2016/China-averaged--29-chemical-accidents-per-month-so-far-this-year---Greenpeace/9169315e-573a-48e8-83a6-b0fce05c4f16http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/1NS8jFX5kGs/Greenpeace urges G20 governments to bring Paris Agreement into force this yearBeijing, 5 September 2016 - The Hangzhou G20 communique issued today brings climate change to the center stage of the global political agenda and sends a strong signal for all nations to join the Paris Agreement as soon as possible. Greenpeace urges governments around the world to bring the Paris Agreement into force by the end of this year and begin working on a new era of more ambitious global climate action. <p></p><p>“Less than a year after the adoption of the Paris Agreement, under the Chinese Presidency, the G20 has finally moved forward on key issues for tackling climate change. Countries now need to react to the strong call from the G20 to formally join and ratify the Paris Agreement as soon as possible, so that the Agreement can enter into force this year,” said Jennifer Morgan, Executive Director of Greenpeace International.</p><p></p><p>“Investors should pay close attention and not miss the momentum on shifting trillions of dollars from dirty to clean investments.”</p><p></p><p>“Hosts to this year’s G20, China has shown great leadership on climate over the last year. Against a backdrop of declining coal consumption and rapid renewable energy growth, China has even greater potential now to match its political effort with further action,” said Li Shuo, Greenpeace East Asia’s Senior Climate Policy Adviser.</p><p></p><p>The upcoming Montreal Protocol discussions and the International Civil Aviation Organisation process will be the next key steps for China to show its commitment to tackling climate change.</p><p></p><p>The lack of progress on outlining a concrete timetable for the phasing out of fossil fuel subsidies is a reminder that the G20’s collective action on climate change must go further.</p><p></p><p>“Handing out money to the fossil fuel industry is simply not compatible with the Paris Agreement,” said Li Shuo.</p><p></p><p>In the coming year, Germany must take up the mantle and continue to push for strong climate action in its role as G20 President. Greenpeace urges Germany to lead by example and show the world that it is ready to transform its economy into a zero-carbon economy and finalise the phase-out of coal by 2035 the latest.</p><p></p><p>The Paris Agreement will enter into force after 55 countries that account for at least 55% of global emissions have joined the agreement. So far 26 countries, accounting for 39% of emissions have joined the Agreement.[1] A surge in countries joining the Agreement is expected in the coming months.</p><p></p><p><strong>Notes to editor:</strong><br />[1] http://unfccc.int/paris_agreement/items/9485.php</p><p></p><p><strong>Media contacts:</strong></p><p></p><p>Tom Baxter, International Communications Officer, Greenpeace East Asia, email: tom.baxter@greenpeace.org ph: +86 18811344861</p><p></p><p>Li Shuo, Senior Climate Policy Adviser, Greenpeace East Asia, email: li.shuo@greenpeace.org, ph: +86 15201681548<br /> <br />Greenpeace International Press Desk, pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org, phone: +31 (0) 20 718 2470 (available 24 hours)</p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/1NS8jFX5kGs" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Mon, 05 Sep 2016 11:30:00 +0200climate & energyTom Baxterhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/climate-energy/2016/Greenpeace-urges-G20-governments-to-bring-Paris-Agreement-into-force-this-year/ff914a5c-9305-45bc-98ea-5519dc56d9e5http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/1lP9zWDXwtE/China must do more to protect its UNESCO natural heritage sites - GreenpeaceBeijing, 27 July, 2016 - A Greenpeace East Asia investigation into China’s remaining Intact Forest Landscape (IFL) [1] has shown that key areas of IFL in northwest Yunnan Province are being damaged by mining activities. Moreover, three of the 24 mining sites identified are located in the Three Parallel Rivers UNESCO world natural heritage site, in direct violation of UNESCO regulations and the Yunnan provincial government’s assurance to UNESCO. The Three Parallel Rivers region and its IFL are some of the most biologically diverse regions on earth, and should be strictly protected from human interference. Greenpeace calls on the Chinese government to include these regions in the upcoming ‘ecological redlines’ protection programme and to ensure the full and effective protection of China’s UNESCO world heritage sites.<p>“The intact forest landscapes of northwestern Yunnan are both a national and a global treasure,” said head of China oceans and forest campaign, Rashid Kang. “Now the country with the second largest number of UNESCO world heritage sites, and with more in the pipeline, China must assure the world that it can effectively protect these globally significant areas.”</p><p></p><p>“As China readies to draw up its new system of ecosystem protection, the ecological redlines, it is vital that protection of UNESCO sites and other intact forest landscapes are taken into account.”</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace’s investigation was conducted through a combination of satellite imagery analysis and field visits. Greenpeace discovered that 490,000 hectares of IFL in China were lost during the period 2000-2013, over half of which (270,000 hectares) occurred in the northwestern region of Yunnan Province. IFL now accounts for just 3.34% of China’s forest areas.</p><p></p><p>According to UNESCO, the Three Parallel Rivers region of Yunnan “may be the most biologically diverse temperate region on earth”. [2]</p><p></p><p>The three mines operating in the world heritage site are engaged in antimony, tungsten and molybdenum mining. Their operations and the transport links they have constructed have caused considerable damage to the surrounding hillsides, including deforestation, creating risks of landslides, and potential tailings (waste water) pollution. Desktop research also showed that one of the mines, the Xiuwachu Tungsten and Molybdenum Ore Mine, is suspected of never having applied for an Environmental Impact Assessment, a requirement under Chinese law.</p><p></p><p>A further 21 mines were found to be located in areas of invaluable IFL. Their activities, too, must be reined in.&nbsp;</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace demands that all mining operations in IFL, and especially those located within the UNESCO world heritage site, be shut down immediately and ecological restoration begin. Greenpeace also calls on the Yunnan government to include Yunnan’s IFL in its forthcoming ‘ecological redlines’ plan and use the new policy to ensure the stability and integrity of these unique and rare ecosystems.</p><p></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p></p><p><strong>Notes to editor:</strong></p><p></p><p>[1] IFL definition: An unbroken expanse of natural ecosystems within the zone of current forest extent, showing no signs of significant human activity and large enough that all native biodiversity, including viable populations of wide-ranging species, could be maintained. <a href="http://www.intactforests.org/concept.html">http://www.intactforests.org/concept.html</a></p><p></p><p>[2] <a href="http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1083">http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1083</a></p><p></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p></p><p><strong>Media Contacts:</strong></p><p></p><p>Tom Baxter,<br />International Communications Officer, Greenpeace East Asia,<br />email: tom.baxter@greenpeace.org<br />phone: +86 188 1134 4861</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace International Press Desk<br />email: pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org,<br />phone: +31 (0) 20 718 2470 (available 24 hours)&nbsp;</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace stands for positive change through action to defend the natural world and promote peace. We are a non-profit organisation with a presence in 40 countries. To maintain its independence, Greenpeace does not accept donations from governments or corporations but relies on contributions from individual supporters and foundation grants.<a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia">www.greenpeace.org/eastasia</a></p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/1lP9zWDXwtE" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Wed, 27 Jul 2016 02:54:00 +0200forestsTom Baxterhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/forests/2016/China-must-do-more-to-protect-its-UNESCO-natural-heritage-sites---Greenpeace/d9949647-84bf-48f8-97e7-344b6e91486chttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/b1CXgJcVUPk/30% of China’s cities see air pollution worsen compared to last spring – GreenpeaceBeijing, 20 July, 2016 – Air pollution data from 367 cities across China shows that PM2.5 levels worsened in close to 30% of cities in the second quarter of 2016 compared to the second quarter of 2015. First tier cities Shanghai and Guangzhou are among the cities which saw deteriorating air quality. Greenpeace East Asia analysis indicates this stalling of at least one year of air pollution improvements is a direct result of an uptick in industrial production, especially steel and concrete, in the second quarter of this year. Greenpeace urges the Chinese government to strengthen controls on coal via a nationwide coal consumption cap and to more stringently control industrial emissions.<p></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;"><span lang="EN-US">“It is extremely disheartening to see the trend of improving air stalling,” said Greenpeace East Asia climate and energy campaigner, Dong Liansai. “However, it is now clearer than ever that air pollution and coal-burning heavy industry are directly connected. The trend is clear, and so too is the solution – accelerate China’s energy transition away from coal.”</span></p><p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;"><span lang="EN-US">&nbsp;</span></p><p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;"><span lang="EN-US">The impact of increased industrial production on air quality was most pronounced in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region. In the second quarter of 2016, Hebei concrete production jumped by 24.2% and steel production by 7%. Shandong steel production also increased by 6%. Correlatively, 13 cities in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region saw average PM2.5 levels increase.</span></p><p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;"><span lang="EN-US">&nbsp;</span></p><p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;"><span lang="EN-US">While Beijing saw PM2.5 concentration fall by 6.9% compared to the second quarter of 2016, both Shanghai and Guangzhou saw concentrations rise by 6.1% and 5.1% respectively.</span></p><p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;"><span lang="EN-US">&nbsp;</span></p><p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;"><span lang="EN-US">Greenpeace analysis also shows that the composition of China’s air pollution is changing. Though still the major culprit, PM2.5 is being joined with PM10 and ozone as elements which the government must battle. The average ozone concentration of the 13 cities in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region for the first half of 2016 was 64.1ug/m3, a rise of 6.3% from the same period in 2015 and a rise of 9.8% compared to the first half of 2014, according to Greenpeace analysis.</span></p><p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;"><span lang="EN-US">&nbsp;</span></p><p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;"><span lang="EN-US">In order to bring back the trend of falling PM2.5 concentration, the Chinese government must make sure to implement a nationwide coal consumption cap in the upcoming energy sector 13<sup>th</sup>&nbsp;Five Year Plan. It is also crucial for local governments to strictly control emissions, especially in heavy industry intensive areas. The government should also learn from the recently published mid-term review of the ‘Air Pollution Prevention &amp; Control Action Plan’ and implement a comprehensive plan for tackling all elements of China’s air pollution, including ozone.</span></p><p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;"><span lang="EN-US">&nbsp;</span></p><p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;"><strong><span lang="EN-US">Media Contact:</span></strong></p><p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;"><span lang="EN-US">&nbsp;</span></p><p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;"><span lang="EN-US">Tom Baxter,</span></p><p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;"><span lang="EN-US">International Communications Officer, Greenpeace East Asia,</span></p><p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;"><span lang="EN-US">email:&nbsp;<a style="color: #1155cc;" href="mailto:tom.baxter@greenpeace.org" target="_blank"><span class="il">tom.baxter@greenpeace.org</span></a></span></p><p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;"><span lang="EN-US">phone:&nbsp;<a style="color: #1155cc;" href="tel:%2B86%20188%201134%204861" target="_blank">+86 188 1134 4861</a></span></p><p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;"><span lang="EN-US">&nbsp;</span></p><p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;"><span lang="EN-US">Greenpeace International Press Desk</span></p><p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;"><span lang="EN-US">email:&nbsp;<a style="color: #1155cc;" href="mailto:pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org" target="_blank">pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org</a>,</span></p><p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;"><span lang="EN-US">phone:&nbsp;<a style="color: #1155cc;" href="tel:%2B31%20%280%29%2020%20718%202470" target="_blank">+31 (0) 20 718 2470</a>&nbsp;(available 24 hours)</span></p><p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0px; color: #222222; font-family: arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12.8px;"><span lang="EN-US">&nbsp;</span></p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/b1CXgJcVUPk" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Thu, 21 Jul 2016 02:32:00 +0200climate & energyamcgurkhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/climate-energy/2016/30-of-Chinas-cities-see-air-pollution-worsen-compared-to-last-spring--Greenpeace/ad509aad-d15a-48cc-9728-c279d68ef75dhttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/A79G340_shE/Over 1 trillion rmb could be wasted on redundant coal power in China – Greenpeace reportBeijing, 13 July, 2016 –<p></p>Beijing, 13 July, 2016 – Despite government attempts to reign in China’s coal power overcapacity crisis, Greenpeace research finds that a total of over 1 trillion rmb could be wasted on excess capacity by 2020. Despite a new overcapacity policy, China still has enough coal-fired projects in the pipeline to keep adding one coal-fired power plant per week until 2020, potentially resulting in a total of 400,000MW of excess capacity. The overcapacity crisis will slow down China’s energy transition, making it harder for renewables to be fully utilised and have a large environmental impact. Greenpeace calls on the Chinese government to urgently extend its ban on new permits and begin to cancel projects on a selective basis.<p></p><p>“China’s worsening coal overcapacity crisis is acting as a dead weight on the country’s ongoing energy transition,” said Greenpeace coal campaigner Lauri Myllyvirta.</p><p></p><p>Reports emerged on Monday that China’s upcoming energy five-year plan could suspend permits to all new coal power plant projects.[1] This would be an important step that could avoid up to 110,000MW of overcapacity and 300 billion yuan of wasted capital.</p><p></p><p>“The government needs to move ahead urgently on a ban on all new permits,” said Lauri Myllyvirta. “However, the vast number of projects which recently entered construction would be left untouched. It is necessary to begin cancelling projects and dramatically accelerate plant retirements.”</p><p></p><p>In April 2016 energy planners introduced new regulations to curb the growth in capacity and retire old power plants. Greenpeace mapping shows that in the two months after the policy was introduced, new coal power plants projects started construction at a pace of two per week, in ten different provinces. The officially designated ‘coal power bases’ in Sha’anxi and Inner Mongolia saw a particularly large increase in environmental permit applications this May, totalling over 9,000MW of capacity. Due to exemptions in the new regulations for coal power plants built in western provinces for exporting power to demand centres in the east, power companies in Sha’anxi and Inner Mongolia could proceed with the projects unless the policy is strengthened.</p><p></p><p>Driven by unprecedented growth in clean power generation and slowed power demand growth, demand for coal power fell by 4% in the first five months of 2016. At current rates, China can comfortably cover all increases in electricity demand from renewable and non-fossil energy, making all new coal-fired capacity redundant.</p><p></p><p>Massive overinvestment in coal-fired power is a wasted opportunity to deploy clean energy even faster. It is also exacerbating the problem of ‘wasted’ wind and solar power, as grid operators fail to prioritize renewable energy sources over coal. Furthermore, new coal power projects are heavily concentrated in the most water-scarce areas of China, where water consumption already exceeds renewable supply, such as the ‘coal power bases’ in Sha’anxi and Inner Mongolia.</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace calls on the government to immediately halt permitting and new construction of coal-fired power plants in all provinces, cancel all projects that began construction in provinces with overcapacity in 2015 and further accelerate the retirement of existing power plants.</p><p></p><p>Read the full report <a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/Global/eastasia/publications/reports/climate-energy/2016/Burning%20Money,%20How%20China%20could%20squander%20over%201%20trillion%20yuan%20on%20unneeded%20coal-fired%20capacity,%20Greenpeace.pdf" target="_blank">here</a>.</p><p></p><p><strong>Notes to Editor:</strong></p><p></p><p>[1] 《十三五能源规划首要取向去产能 煤炭、炼油三年不上新项目》 <a href="http://wap.nengapp.com/news/655806">http://wap.nengapp.com/news/655806</a> ; ‘China poised to ban new coal-fired power stations’, <a href="http://www.afr.com/news/china-poised-to-ban-new-coalfired-power-stations-20160711-gq3izc">http://www.afr.com/news/china-poised-to-ban-new-coalfired-power-stations-20160711-gq3izc</a></p><p></p><p><strong>Media Contacts:</strong></p><p></p><p>Tom Baxter,<br />International Communications Officer, Greenpeace East Asia,<br />email: tom.baxter@greenpeace.org<br />phone: +86 188 1134 4861</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace International Press Desk<br />email: pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org,<br />phone: +31 (0) 20 718 2470 (available 24 hours)</p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/A79G340_shE" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Wed, 13 Jul 2016 02:00:00 +0200climate & energyamcgurkhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/climate-energy/2016/Over-1-trillion-rmb-wasted-coal-power-China/ffc234f8-13be-45f1-a8b7-5242059228abhttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/zh8JRfJcxc8/Greenpeace releases Hong Kong and Taiwan consumer report HONG KONG, 22 Jun 2016 ¬– A Greenpeace study has found that Hong Kong residents seldom or never wear an estimated HKD 3.9 billion worth of clothing that they have purchased. The study was conducted by TNS, an independent global research agency, to uncover the shopping habits and consumer mentality of people in Hong Kong and Taiwan. Greenpeace urges Hong Kong public to reflect on their shopping habits and consumer mentality as well as pursue a more sustainable shopping lifestyle. Greenpeace also suggests the Hong Kong government commits to developing a sustainable fashion industry in Hong Kong.<p><span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;">Greenpeace Campaigner Bonnie Tang said: "Although Hong Kong residents own nearly 100 pieces of clothing and seldom or never wear so many items, each year the average resident will still shop more than 10 times for clothing and spend nearly HK</span>D 10,000 on new clothes. Does shopping equal being fashionable? I think it is time for us to reflect deeply upon our shopping habits and mentality."</p><p></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: small;"><br /> </span>TNS interviewed 2,000 Hong Kong and Taiwan residents for the study, ranging in age from 20 to 45 years old, half of which are parents. The main findings are:</p><p></p><ul type="disc"><p></p><li><span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;">Hong Kong residents own an average of 94 pieces of clothing; </span></li><p></p><li><span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;">Hong Kong women own an average of 109 pieces of clothing, 30% more than men;</span></li><p></p><li><span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;">16% of all the clothes owned by Hong Kong residents (equivalent to 15 items) are seldom or never worn; and</span></li><p></p><li><span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;">Assuming each piece of clothing is worth HK</span>D 100, Greenpeace estimated that Hong Kong residents wasted HKD 3.9 billion on buying clothes that they seldom or never wear.</li><p></p></ul><p></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman'; font-size: small;"><br /> </span>Last year, Greenpeace estimated that the equivalents of roughly 1,400 t-shirts are discarded every minute in Hong Kong. This year, the TNS study exposed the fact that every Hong Kong person discards one each of t-shirts, trousers, shirts, coats, knitwear/sweaters, and a pair of shoes every year. The main reason given by respondents for clothing disposal in Hong Kong was 'the sizes of the clothes don't fit me anymore'. Only 27% of all Hong Kong residents repaired their clothes in the two months prior to the study, showing that instead of repairing their clothes, Hong Kong people predominantly choose to discard them. In Taiwan, the main reason given by respondents for clothing disposal was 'the clothes are damaged or stained.' The percentages of Hong Kong and Taiwanese residents who consider recycling their clothing are 62% and 73% respectively. However, 40% of overall respondents consider discarding clothes directly.<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman';"><br /> <br /> </span>Nonetheless, the 2016 TNS study shows that the environmental awareness of Hong Kong parents is considerably higher than the average respondent. Nearly 60% of parents are concerned about the hazardous chemicals produced during clothing manufacturing. Moreover, almost 70% of Hong Kong parents consider purchasing second-hand clothes for their kids, clearly showing that there is significant market potential for developing sustainable fashion for children in Hong Kong. However, future sustainable fashion brands must be aware that the industry lacks communicative channels, platforms and networks in the Hong Kong second-hand clothing market.<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman';"><br /> <br /> </span>Sustainable fashion is not prevalent among residents in Hong Kong and Taiwan. For Hong Kong residents, the price of clothing is the most important purchase consideration. More than half of the Hong Kong respondents said they have never purchased second-hand or sustainable fashion and stated that they do not know where to buy them. John Tsang, HKSAR Financial Secretary, stated clearly in the HKSAR 2015-2016 budget that the Hong Kong government would invest HKD500 million to promote the development of Hong Kong's fashion designers and brands. Yet, the funding is not specifically dedicated to sustainable fashion development. Greenpeace suggests the HKSAR government takes a more proactive and leading role in developing sustainable fashion in Hong Kong.<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman';"><br /> <br /> </span>Greenpeace Campaigner Bonnie Tang recommended: "Hong Kong should evaluate its fashion sustainability and learn from cities around the globe. Many cities have been actively developing their second-hand clothing markets and they are also promoting and supporting the development of sustainable fashion. For example, the European Union implemented the European Sustainable Clothing Action Plan (ECAP) in 2015, aimed at adopting a circular approach to divert over 90,000 tonnes/year of clothing waste from landfill and incineration across Europe by 2019. ECAP will engage designers, brands, retailers, public, public procurers, and recyclers to integrate sustainability improvements within the design, production, procurement, sale, use, and disposal of clothing.<span style="font-family: 'Times New Roman';"><br /></span></p><p></p><p><strong>Media Contact:</strong></p><p></p><p>Bonnie Tang,<br />Greenpeace Campaigner<br />email: bonnie.tang@greenpeace.org<br />phone: 2854 8371</p><p></p><p>Ray Yeung, <br />Greenpeace Communications Officer<br />email: ray.yeung@greenpeace.org<br />phone: 2854 8376</p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/zh8JRfJcxc8" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Tue, 28 Jun 2016 10:18:00 +0200other issuesamcgurkhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/others/20161/Greenpeace-releases-Hong-Kong-and-Taiwan-consumer-report-/27824382-43cb-47db-8f8d-d0b55a1168cchttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/wUUMeU4iUOQ/Greenpeace Urges Hong Kong Residents to ‘Buy Smart, Buy Less’HONG KONG, 23 June 2016 – Today in Causeway Bay, Greenpeace visualized Hong Kongers’ shopping habits in the form of a 2.5m tall ‘Giant Girl’ that wore a dress upcycled from dozens of articles of used clothing and held shopping bags that featured the message ‘100 Clothes But Nothing to Wear?’. The performance art was created to highlight the key findings of a recent Greenpeace study focused on the shopping habits and mentality of consumers in Hong Kong and Taiwan. <p dir="ltr"><span>The study showed that a Hong Kong resident owns an average of 100 pieces of clothing and 16% of these clothes are seldom or never worn. Results also showed that each year the average resident will still shop 10 times for clothing and spend nearly HK$10,000 on new clothes. Greenpeace calls on the Hong Kong public to ‘Buy Smart, Buy Less’ by reducing unnecessary spending and embracing a sustainable, fashion lifestyle.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Greenpeace Campaigner Bonnie Tang said: “</span><span>’I have 100 pieces of clothing but I still feel like I have nothing to wear.’ </span><span>Is that really what people think? Yes. According to our study, Hong Kong people really think and act like that. We encourage the public to be aware of their shopping habits and to try shopping alternatives such as wearing second-hand clothing, repairing worn items, and considering upcycling rather than discarding old clothes.”</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Greenpeace collected used clothing from sources online and collaborated with local artist Wong Wing Fung to upcycle them into a dress to visualize the shopping habits of Hong Kong people. Wong Wing Fung said: ‘Personally, I will not buy T-shirts anymore, as their lifespans are way too short. I love vintage clothes though! Not only are vintage clothes much more durable, they also have interesting and personal stories of the previous owners attached to them. Isn’t that lovely?’ </span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Greenpeace calls on the Hong Kong public to reflect on their shopping habits and consumer mentality as well as realise the detrimental environmental impact of their unsustainable shopping lifestyles. We must pursue a sustainable fashion lifestyle.</span></p><p></p><p><span id="docs-internal-guid-cc44c2bc-9682-29ce-8345-aefeb5cdc754"><span><img src="https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/sCJhYLuQAkOk3ZyBwwZQXOxmttVUibowFuDzp3dx1H2_rpKieCYwZhrDDmQQVMrZ69oC51uawTPufztrhUHrfO67N0mhe-r7AdQ_Q-esnwjr6cRbUxpG1UrmvSrS2xPFSJQeZeNv" alt="DSC01859 (1).jpg" width="624" height="416" /></span></span></p><p></p><p><strong>Media Contact:</strong></p><p></p><p>Bonnie Tang, <br />Greenpeace Campaigner<br />email: bonnie.tang@greenpeace.org<br />phone: 2854 8371</p><p></p><p><br />Ray Yeung, <br />Greenpeace Communications Officer<br />email: ray.yeung@greenpeace.org<br />phone: 2854 8376</p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/wUUMeU4iUOQ" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Tue, 28 Jun 2016 09:40:00 +0200other issuesamcgurkhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/others/20161/Greenpeace-Urges-Hong-Kong-Residents-to-Buy-Smart-Buy-Less/a223fee2-e120-4f88-a109-f890da955e1dhttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/O0LYCrfaV0A/Greenpeace East Asia responds to IEA report on Energy and Air PollutionBeijing, Monday June 27 - The IEA’s report on Energy and Air Pollution, released today, underlines the urgency in moving to clean forms of energy if we are to stop millions of premature deaths around the world. The WHO (World Health Organisation) estimates that 3 million people die every year from outdoor air pollution from fossil fuels. <p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>With current energy policies, the IEA predicts that premature deaths from air pollution will rise steeply in the coming years, particularly in Asia, even taking into account improved emission standards for power plants and vehicles which are supposed to improve air quality.&nbsp; This is because of rising and ageing populations, increased fossil fuel use in the ‘business-as-usual’ scenario, and more people moving to cities.&nbsp; Premature deaths from fossil-fuel burning will go up from 3 million to 4.5 million, with nearly all of that increase (90%) happening in Asia. &nbsp;</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>India could see 900,000 premature deaths and a reduction in average life expectancy of 15 months because of air pollution.&nbsp; Indonesia could have 120,000 premature deaths, with 12 months cut from average life expectancy and China a huge 1.5 million premature deaths, and 16 months reduction.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Action on energy efficiency and clean energy, and better emission standards, could avoid many of these deaths.&nbsp; But this means halving the growth in coal consumption from current plans in India and Indonesia, and reducing consumption by 25% below current levels in China.&nbsp; The gap in energy demand must be filled with renewables and energy efficiency.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Lauri Myllyvirta, senior global coal campaigner with Greenpeace East Asia, said:</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>“Governments in the region have a responsibility to look after the health of their people.&nbsp; Air pollution affects everyone, rich and poor, and policies based on business-as-usual are killing, and will continue to kill, hundreds of thousands of their citizens.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>“Air pollution from fossil fuels is a public health emergency both in industrialized and emerging economies. A plan to phase out fossil fuels is needed not only to combat climate change but to stop millions of lives being cut short by air pollution. Those governments still pursuing new coal-fired power plants are writing the death sentences of their people today, and condemning future generations to lives cut short by air pollution.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>“As the IEA says, the technologies already exist to prevent this bleak future.&nbsp; It is up to governments to use them.”</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Contact</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Lauri Myllyvirta, senior coal campaigner, Greenpeace East Asia, </span><a href="mailto:lauri.myllyvirta@greenpeace.org" target="_blank"><span>lauri.myllyvirta@greenpeace.org</span></a><span>, mobile </span><span><a href="tel:%2B86%20157%201002%201563" target="_blank">+86 157 1002 1563</a></span><span> (China)</span></p><p></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Joanna Mills, communications, </span><a href="mailto:joanna.mills@greenpeace.org" target="_blank"><span>joanna.mills@greenpeace.org</span></a><span>, mobile <a href="tel:%2B44%207791%20493451" target="_blank">+44 7791 493451</a></span></p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/O0LYCrfaV0A" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Tue, 28 Jun 2016 03:56:00 +0200climate & energyamcgurkhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/climate-energy/2016/Greenpeace-East-Asia-responds-to-IEA-report-on-Energy-and-Air-Pollution/43f56a11-0527-4ff7-8734-71ffa51a2d02http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/6q9k6jv6s80/Greenpeace calls on Hong Kong Government to demand suspension of Taishan Nuclear Plant amid safety concerns19 April 2016, Hong Kong – Greenpeace is calling on the Hong Kong government to protect its residents and demand China suspend construction of the world’s largest nuclear reactors amid safety concerns being raised from an identical project in France. The French Nuclear Safety Authority (ASN) confirmed safety issues with a reactor under construction in Flamanville and warned that Taishan Nuclear Power Plant, which shares the same design, may suffer from identical faults. Specifically the pressure vessel’s head and bottom head may be compromised and could fracture causing a nuclear disaster on a larger scale than Chernobyl or Fukushima according to Greenpeace’s analysis.<p>Senior nuclear specialist with Greenpeace Germany, Shaun Burnie, pointed out carbon contents in pressure vessel lids of Flamanville reactor was found to exceed regulatory limit. He said,“When the reactor is in operation, the pressure vessel is continuously subjected to high temperatures, high pressure and radiation, making the steel gradually brittle. There's a chance the pressure vessel will fracture during operation. Considering the size of the 1750 MW reactor, once a critical radiation leak happens, it may become the worst nuclear disaster in history.”<br /> <br /> As the 30th anniversary of the Chernobyl nuclear accident approaches, governments housing nuclear reactors are provided a sober reminder of the dangers of nuclear power. However, the Hong Kong government has stated that its citizens would not need to evacuate if there was a nuclear leak since the Taishan Nuclear Power Plant is 130 km from Hong Kong's urban areas. Greenpeace’s Burnie disagrees, pointing out that following the Chernobyl nuclear disaster, radioactive fallout spread over a range of more than 100km, and during the Fukushima nuclear accident, local authorities thought that it might be necessary to evacuate Tokyo residents, 160 km away from the Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant.</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace senior campaigner in Hong Kong, Frances Yeung, also criticized Hong Kong officials as being irresponsible for the world’s largest capacity reactors. “How far nuclear fallout spreads depends on many factors such as weather conditions, humidity and wind direction. The Hong Kong government has never published any worst case scenario assessments of the design characteristics of Taishan Nuclear Power Plant and considered the effect of our various weather conditions. Without the correct analysis, our officials cannot in good conscious claim that Hong Kong people won’t be affected. They are showing a complete disregard for the public’s safety.”</p><p></p><p>The ASN exposed the issue with the French reactor a year ago this month and ordered the contractor to investigate. Last Wednesday, Electricité de France (EDF) announced that initial analyses conducted on parts similar to those at Flamanville 3 have shown that the carbon segregation phenomena extend beyond mid-thickness on one of them and bore out reason to continue concern. However, China’s government and the Taishan plant’s project owner, China General Nuclear Power Group, have yet to publicly clarify whether or not Taishan carries the same risk.</p><p></p><p>To protect the safety of Hong Kong’s residents and their right to know, Greenpeace demands the Hong Kong government request the Guangdong provincial government to:</p><p></p><ul><p></p><li>Suspend all work on the Taishan Nuclear Power Plant until French nuclear safety authorities complete their investigation and clarify the safety issue(s);</li><p></p><li>Request China’s National Nuclear Safety Administration to disclose all details of their communications with the ASN; and,</li><p></p><li>Disclose whether Taishan Nuclear Power Plant shares the same safety issues as the power plant in Flamanville as well as clarify contingency measures and plans.</li><p></p></ul><p></p><p><br /> Media contacts:</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace Senior Campaigner Frances Yeung</p><p></p><p>Email：<a href="mailto:frayeung@greenpeace.org">frayeung@greenpeace.org</a><br /> Phone：2854 8303<br /> <br /> Greenpeace Communications Officer Ray Yeung</p><p></p><p>Email：<a href="mailto:ray.yeung@greenpeace.org">ray.yeung@greenpeace.org</a><br /> Phone：2854 8376</p><p></p><p>&nbsp;</p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/6q9k6jv6s80" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Tue, 21 Jun 2016 10:04:00 +0200climate & energyamcgurkhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/climate-energy/2016/Greenpeace-demands-suspension/4425ad80-0a9b-4694-a109-a542435e8ae5http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/DaekmD27hKU/China releases its first ever soil pollution prevention plan, Greenpeace responseBeijing, 31 May, 2016 - China’s State Council today released the Soil Pollution Prevention Action Plan, China’s first ever policy plan aimed at tackling the country’s prevalent soil pollution problem. The document aims to ensure that 90% of currently polluted farmland is usable by 2020. Greenpeace East Asia urges the government to strengthen the plan by complementing it with legal measures and reforming the country’s polluting agricultural system.<div><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>“A policy to tackle China’s endemic soil pollution has been desperately overdue for years now. In terms of its ambition, comprehensiveness and its promise to regularly disclose data to the public, the Soil Pollution Prevention Action Plan is a welcome first step,” said Ada Kong Greenpeace East Asia toxics manager.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>As more and more heavy industries move from eastern to central and western China, it is vital to combat the potential correlative spread of soil pollution.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>“The action plan must be given the teeth to truly combat soil pollution. Greenpeace urge the government to complement the plan with soil pollution law and tackle agricultural pollution, before it is too late,” said Ada Kong.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Given that an estimated one fifth of China’s farmland soil is severely polluted [1], the Soil Pollution Prevention Action Plan is extremely ambitious. Its aim to have 90% of polluted farmland usable to grow food will put extra pressure on the Ministry of Agriculture (MOA) to achieve its agriculture pollution prevention goals by 2020.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Soil pollution in China is a serious problem which has posed major health risks for years. Most recently, the Changzhou Foreign Languages School </span><a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/toxics/2016/Pollution-linked-to-cases-of-cancer-in-Changzhou-middle-school--Greenpeace-response/" target="_blank"><span>scandal</span></a><span> in March showed again just how desperately effective soil pollution prevention policy is needed.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>The Soil Pollution Prevention Action Plan will require effective coordination between departments and rigorous enforcement in order to tackle China’s epidemic soil pollution problem. Greenpe</span><span>ace urges the MEP to go the extra step and introduce soil protection law to complement and strengthen the action plan. In addition, both the MEP and MOA should work to reform China’s agricultural model into a sustainable and ecological model.</span></p><p></p><br /><span>[1] </span><span><a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/chinas-choice/2014/apr/18/china-one-fifth-farmland-soil-pollution" target="_blank">http://www.theguardian.com/environment/chinas-choice/2014/apr/18/china-one-fifth-farmland-soil-pollution</a></span><p></p><div><span><strong>Media Contact:</strong></span></div><p></p><div><p></p><p>Tom Baxter,<br />International Communications Officer, Greenpeace East Asia,<br />email: tom.baxter@greenpeace.org<br />phone: +86 188 1134 4861</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace International Press Desk<br />email: pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org,<br />phone: +31 (0) 20 718 2470 (available 24 hours)</p><p></p><span>Greenpeace stands for positive change through action to defend the natural world and promote peace. We are a non-profit organisation with a presence in 40 countries. To maintain its independence, Greenpeace does not accept donations from governments or corporations but relies on contributions from individual supporters and foundation grants.</span><span><a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia" target="_blank">www.greenpeace.org/eastasia</a></span></div><p></p></div><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/DaekmD27hKU" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Wed, 01 Jun 2016 03:19:00 +0200toxicsTom Baxterhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/toxics/2016/China-releases-its-first-ever-soil-pollution-prevention-plan-Greenpeace-response/1a0db12a-e2f4-4ac0-9656-9cfb64bc4cfahttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/ceiabJdm-NE/15,000 people and key Yangtze River ecosystem areas in close proximity to Jiangsu Deqiao Chemical Storage facility fire, GreenpeaceBeijing, 23 April, 2016 - Yesterday morning at 09:40 the Jiangsu Deqiao Chemical Storage facility in Jingjiang city, Jiangsu Province, caught fire. The facility, located next to the Yangtze River, stores up to 56 chemicals categorised as ‘hazardous’ by the Chinese government. Greenpeace East Asia analysis has found that up to 15,000 people live within 5km of the site. A number of water and ecosystem protection areas are also in close proximity to the facility. The accident is yet another example of the worrying lack of oversight and management of China’s chemical industry, and a reminder of the risks this poses to ecosystems and citizens across the country.<p dir="ltr"><span>“Not a week has passed since the Changzhou ‘toxic school’ case, and already another potentially dangerous chemicals disaster has hit the news”, said Greenpeace East Asia</span><span> toxics campaign assistant manager, Cheng Qian.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>“The government must urgently investigate the dangers hazardous chemicals in China pose to people and the environment and act to prevent these all-too-common incidents from occurring again.”</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>The Jiangsu Deqiao Chemical Storage facility’s January 2016 Environmental Impact Assessment states that the facility poses high risks to the adjacent environmentally sensitive area. Within 5km of the facility there are a total of 28 villages, housing up to 15,000 people. The closest village is just 335 meters from the storage facility. Moreover, two drinking water protection areas (Qingsha Protected Area and Yaqiao Protected Area) and three Ecological Protection Areas are located close to the facility.</span></p><p></p><div><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>The Jiangsu Deqiao Chemical Storage facility’s January 2016 Environmental Impact Assessment states that the facility poses high risks to the adjacent environmentally sensitive area. Within 5km of the facility there are a total of 28 villages, housing up to 15,000 people. The closest village is just 335 meters from the storage facility. Moreover, two drinking water protection areas (Qingsha Protected Area and Yaqiao Protected Area) and three Ecological Protection Areas are located close to the facility.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span><img class="CToWUd a6T" src="https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/q7H4imOSTgiuCdbNMkf4kTmNhQ8x8e2C4gUGMmZZ50TStJ1D-lnsfdSJuBnYslcgcgl0rt_Fs-fiQwQTS2OWFgGuJ2KzGr6TemVaLng6sJkxnzbPrq2TJ6LQTEjsBkYtN0ftcFN4" alt="" width="455" height="309" /></span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>‘Jiangsu Deqiao Chemical Storage Company Ltd. (Including Jingjiang Shuangjiang Port Company) Storage Zone and Pier </span><span>Adjustments and New </span><span>Project Environmental Impact Assessment Report’, January 2016 [1]</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>On 19 April MEP Minister Chen Jining noted the problems in China’s chemicals industry, pointing out that 12% of hazardous chemical facilities nationwide are located within 1km of drinking water protection areas, important ecosystem protection areas and other environmentally sensitive zones. He also noted that 10% of facilities are located less than 1km from residential areas. [2]</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Earlier this year, President Xi Jinping called for environmental protection and ‘green development’ in the Yangtze River Economic Belt. [3] Yet, the Yangtze River is also seeing an expanding chemical industry , whose lax management of is one of the major threats to the region’s fragile environment and safety.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Greenpeace urges the government to evaluate the hazards and long-term impacts of hazardous &nbsp;chemicals in use in China, and to develop a sound chemical management system that prevents industrial discharges, emissions and losses of hazardous chemicals into water bodies, air and soil.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Notes to Editor:</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>[1] &nbsp;</span><a href="http://hbj.taizhou.gov.cn/module/download/downfile.jsp?classid=0&amp;filename=1601120942545126369.pdf" target="_blank"><span>http://hbj.taizhou.gov.cn/module/download/downfile.jsp?classid=0&amp;filename=1601120942545126369.pdf</span></a></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>[2] &nbsp;<a href="http://www.nbd.com.cn/articles/2016-04-20/999551.html" target="_blank">http://www.nbd.com.cn/articles/2016-04-20/999551.html</a></span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>[3] &nbsp;</span><a href="http://xw.qq.com/news/20160107049460/NEW2016010704946006" target="_blank"><span>http://xw.qq.com/news/20160107049460/NEW2016010704946006</span></a></p><p></p><p>Media Contact:</p><p></p><p>Tom Baxter,<br />International Communications Officer, Greenpeace East Asia,<br />email: tom.baxter@greenpeace.org<br />phone: +86 188 1134 4861</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace International Press Desk<br />email: pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org,<br />phone: +31 (0) 20 718 2470 (available 24 hours)</p><p></p></div><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/ceiabJdm-NE" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Sat, 23 Apr 2016 08:16:00 +0200toxicsamcgurkhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/toxics/2016/15000-people-and-key-Yangtze-River-ecosystem-areas-in-close-proximity-to-Jiangsu-Deqiao-Chemical-Storage-facility-fire-Greenpeace/2bc9b729-4095-4e01-9e90-3060dc81c773http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/Ya1MFv0AkIo/As eastern China’s air quality improves rapidly, 69 cities in central and western China see air quality deteriorating – GreenpeaceBeijing, 20 April, 2016 – Greenpeace East Asia’s city rankings for the first quarter of 2016 show significant improvements in average air quality in 362 cities across the country. The improvements are particularly rapid in eastern China’s three ‘key regions’. [1] However, air quality in more than 85% of cities failed to meet national standards. Moreover, a number of central and western cities are seeing worsening air pollution.<p>“The findings show that the government’s measures to curb air pollution in eastern China’s key regions work”, said Greenpeace East Asia climate and energy campaigner Dong Liansai, “But now is not the time to selectively implement these policies. They must be introduced across the country to ensure clean air for all.”</p><p></p><p>The average PM2.5 concentration for the 362 cities recorded in the first quarter of 2016 was 60.7ug/m3, a fall of 8.8% compared to the first quarter of 2015. Beijing and Shanghai saw average concentration fall by 27% and 12% respectively. A total of 85.6% of ranked cities still fail to meet China’s national air quality standard of 35ug/m3, however. None of the cities met the WHO standard of 10ug/m3.</p><p></p><p>Concentrations of PM2.5 in eastern China’s three key regions have fallen rapidly as a result of the government’s stringent ‘Action Plan for Air Pollution Prevention and Control’, introduced in 2013. At the same time, however, 91 of 355 cities saw average PM2.5 levels increase. 69 of these cities are located in central and western provinces and saw an average increase of 20.1%. The five cities with the highest concentrations of PM2.5 in the first quarter of 2016 are all located in western China’s Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region.</p><p></p><p>Moreover, a rise in coal fired power plant investment in central and western areas, specifically because their air pollution and emissions regulations are more lax, could see PM2.5 concentration rise further in the region. Greenpeace statistics show that in 2015, 75% of all Environmental Impact Assessment permits for coal fired power plants were located in central and western China.</p><p></p><p>In order to tackle air pollution across the country, Greenpeace urges the Chinese government to introduce a national coal consumption cap in the upcoming 13th Five Year Plan for Energy Development. The government should also re-address and strengthen air quality targets based on the result of the mid-term review of the ‘Action Plan for Air Pollution Prevention and Control’.</p><p></p><p><strong>Notes to editor:&nbsp;</strong></p><p></p><p>[1] China’s three key regions include Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei (also known as Jing-Jin-Ji), the Yangtze River Delta and The Pearl River Delta.</p><p></p><p>Media briefing included full rankings list can be viewed <a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/Global/eastasia/publications/reports/climate-energy/2016/Greenpeace,%202016%201Q%20city%20rankings_media%20briefing__0420.pdf">here.&nbsp;</a></p><p></p><p><strong>Media contact:</strong></p><p></p><p>Tom Baxter,<br />International Communications Officer, Greenpeace East Asia,<br />email: tom.baxter@greenpeace.org<br />phone: +86 188 1134 4861</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace International Press Desk<br />email: pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org,<br />phone: +31 (0) 20 718 2470 (available 24 hours)</p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/Ya1MFv0AkIo" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Wed, 20 Apr 2016 01:11:00 +0200climate & energyamcgurkhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/climate-energy/2016/As-eastern-Chinas-air-quality-improves-rapidly-69-cities-in-central-and-western-China-see-air-quality-deteriorating--Greenpeace/b15e6d8a-6f1a-4ee9-a316-1fa44a88b4aahttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/a-Wpy0LvpO4/Pollution linked to cases of cancer in Changzhou middle school – Greenpeace responseBeijing, 18 March, 2016 – The news that nearly 500 pupils in Changzhou Foreign Languages School have fallen ill, some diagnosed with cancer, most likely due to extremely high levels of groundwater and soil pollution in the school’s vicinity, is yet another reminder of the seriousness of China’s hazardous chemical pollution. Moreover, the fact that the school earlier this year claimed to have solved the pollution problem points to the gaping holes in hazardous chemical management in China.<p></p><p>“The tragedy that has occurred in Changzhou shows just how dangerously lax China’s hazardous chemical management is,” said Greenpeace East Asia toxics campaign manager, Ada Kong.</p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>The Changzhou Foreign Languages School is located adjacent to a former chemicals plant. The environmental evaluation conducted before the construction of the school suggested that pollution was serious and advised that schools, housing or other public facilities should not be constructed in the area. However, the evaluation only included normal pollutants. It did not assess the presence of other hazardous chemicals related to the site’s former use. A more comprehensive evaluation could have exposed the severity of the risks of building on the site</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>The school was also reportedly using groundwater that was deemed unfit for human use by the environmental evaluation</span><span>.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>The chemicals reportedly found in groundwater and soil at the site include chloroform and benzene, both of which are listed on China’s ‘Hazardous Chemicals List’ and are known to have serious health, including carcinogenic properties, and environmental impacts.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Greenpeace calls on the government to investigate the precise origins of this incident and to establish a comprehensive hazardous chemicals management system to prevent such tragedies from occurring again.</span></p><p></p><p><strong>Media contact:</strong></p><p></p><p>Tom Baxter,<br />International Communications Officer, Greenpeace East Asia,<br />email: tom.baxter@greenpeace.org<br />phone: +86 188 1134 4861<br /> <br />Greenpeace International Press Desk<br />email: pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org,<br />phone: +31 (0) 20 718 2470 (available 24 hours)</p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/a-Wpy0LvpO4" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Mon, 18 Apr 2016 07:19:00 +0200toxicsamcgurkhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/toxics/2016/Pollution-linked-to-cases-of-cancer-in-Changzhou-middle-school--Greenpeace-response/a8df6b90-3c63-44ae-80c6-73d37fa05b22http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/dto4HGVkyzY/Data shows China’s economy is breaking free from coal - GreenpeaceBeijing, 15 April, 2016 - A trove of data on economic performance in the first quarter of 2016, released by China’s National Bureau of Statistics this morning, shows that while China’s overall economy saw some improvement, coal use and CO2 continue to fall. Electricity consumption grew 3% year on year, but growth in non-fossil energy pushed fossil power generation down by over 2%. Coal output fell by a dramatic 5%, as coal-fired power generation and steel output was scaled back.<p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>“Today’s data shows that China’s economy is breaking free from coal,” said Greenpeace’s senior campaigner on coal, </span><span>Lauri Myllyvirta.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>“Clean energy is booming and the economic structure is shifting rapidly away from smokestack industries. This is major news for China and the whole world.”</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>The dramatic remaking of China’s economic structure is highlighted by the widening gap between growth in power demand from the “old” and “new” economic sectors. Manufacturing electricity consumption was flat while demand from service and household sectors grew 11%.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>The rapid reduction in China’s reliance on coal and coal-fired power is a boon for global efforts to fight climate change, but should also draw more attention to ballooning overcapacity in coal-fired power and heavy industry. As a legacy of the country’s coal boom, China still has the equivalent of 300 large coal-fired power plants under construction, despite massive overcapacity. [1] A ban on issuing new permits for coal-fired power plants must be implemented and existing overcapacity curtailed.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>Notes to editor:</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>[1] The Greenpeace report ‘Is China Doubling Down on its Coal Power Bubble’ can be seen </span><span><a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/Global/eastasia/publications/reports/climate-energy/2016/Greenpeace_Doubling%20Down%20on%20Coal%20Power%202015%20(update).pdf">here</a></span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>Media contacts:</strong></p><p></p><p>Tom Baxter,<br />International Communications Officer, Greenpeace East Asia,<br />email: tom.baxter@greenpeace.org<br />phone: +86 188 1134 4861</p><p></p><p>Lauri Myllyvirta,<br />Senior Campaigner, Coal, Greenpeace<br />email: lauri.myllyvirta@greenpeace.org<br />phone: +85264113465</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace International Press Desk<br />email: pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org,<br />phone: +31 (0) 20 718 2470 (available 24 hours)</p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/dto4HGVkyzY" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Fri, 15 Apr 2016 03:11:00 +0200climate & energyamcgurkhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/climate-energy/2016/Data-shows-Chinas-economy-is-breaking-free-from-coal---Greenpeace/c1cd37dc-8ea8-4c5a-83ec-08125c816fechttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/ghNkw-8elmw/More than 80% of shallow groundwater wells in China unfit for human use, Greenpeace reactionBeijing, 12 April, 2016 – Yesterday's announcement from China’s Ministry of Water Resources (MWR) that more than 80% of tested shallow groundwater wells in China are polluted and unfit for human use is another stark warning of the extent of groundwater pollution in China.<p>“Water pollution in China is every bit as serious an issue as air pollution,” said Greenpeace East Asia toxics campaign manager Ada Kong.</p><p></p><p>“It is a positive sign that the Ministry of Water Resources acknowledges the extent of the problem. The next step is to take serious action to tackle this crisis.”</p><p></p><p>In 2011 the National Groundwater Pollution Prevention Plan promised 34 billion rmb to tackle water pollution. In the ‘Water Ten’ action plan, issued April 2015, the&nbsp;Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP)&nbsp;pledged to control water quality deterioration by 2020. Currently, however, the roles and responsibilities of the MEP and the MWR in these plans are unclear. Coordination between the two ministries must be strengthened.</p><p></p><p>This is the first time that the MWR has included groundwater quality into its monthly groundwater report. Collecting such information and making it public is a step in the right direction. However, the testing does not take deep groundwater, which many urban areas rely on, into account and is not coordinated with the MEP’s groundwater tests.</p><p></p><p>Groundwater pollution is a massive problem in China which is in urgent need of attention. Greenpeace East Asia urges the government to include deep groundwater in its testing. Crucially, MEP and MWR cooperation must be both clarified and strengthened. Greenpeace East Asia will continue to monitor the government’s progress in achieving the targets of the National Groundwater Pollution Prevention Plan and ‘Water Ten’.</p><p></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p></p><p><strong>Media contact:</strong></p><p></p><p>Tom Baxter<br />International Communications Officer, Greenpeace East Asia<br />email:&nbsp;<a href="mailto:tom.baxter@greenpeace.org" target="_blank">tom.baxter@greenpeace.org</a><br />phone:&nbsp;<a href="tel:%2B86%20188%201134%204861" target="_blank">+86 188 1134 4861</a></p><p></p><p>Greenpeace International Press Desk<br />Email:&nbsp;<a href="mailto:pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org" target="_blank">pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org</a><br />phone:&nbsp;<a href="tel:%2B31%20%280%29%2020%20718%202470" target="_blank">+31 (0) 20 718 2470</a>&nbsp;(available 24 hours)</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace stands for positive change through action to defend the natural world and promote peace. We are a non-profit organisation with a presence in 40 countries. To maintain its independence, Greenpeace does not accept donations from governments or corporations but relies on contributions from individual supporters and foundation grants.<a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia" target="_blank">www.greenpeace.org/eastasia</a></p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/ghNkw-8elmw" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Tue, 12 Apr 2016 06:24:00 +0200toxicsTom Baxterhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/toxics/2016/More-than-80-of-shallow-groundwater-wells-in-China-unfit-for-human-use-Greenpeace-reaction/d364f071-4b29-4076-8893-76fc55d048f6http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/SciB9NgQSfE/China begins to suspend coal-fired power plant approvals, Greenpeace responseBeijing, 24 March, 2016 - Chinese media today reported that the country’s National Energy Administration (NEA) has ordered 13 provincial governments to suspend approvals of new coal-fired power plant projects until the end of 2017. [1] Another group of 15 provinces has been ordered to delay new construction of projects that have already been approved. Greenpeace East Asia’s initial assessment of the implications of the rules indicates that up to 250 coal-fired power plant projects with a total of 170 gigawatts of capacity could be affected if the rules are fully implemented.<p>“China is finally beginning to clamp down on its out of control coal power bubble,” said Greenpeace’s senior campaigner on coal, Lauri Myllyvirta. “However, these new measures fall far short of even halting the build-up of overcapacity in coal-fired power generation, let alone beginning to reduce it.”</p><p></p><p>At least 570 projects with 300 gigawatts of capacity could still come online. [2] This is despite the fact that in the document reportedly sent to provincial governments the NEA state that China’s overcapacity in coal-fired power has reached 20%.</p><p></p><p>In an important policy signal in the run-up to the new five-year plan for the energy sector, the NEA acknowledges that plans for coal industry expansion in China’s western provinces are excessive compared to electricity demand in the eastern provinces, and should be slowed down.</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace has highlighted China’s growing coal power capacity bubble in recent reports and investigations. In 2015 alone, 210 coal-fired power plant projects with a total capacity of 168 gigawatts were moving through the approval pipeline. [3] Driven by distorted incentives and a lack of financial oversight, power companies have continued to add enormous amounts of coal-fired capacity, even as demand for power generation from coal has plummeted as a result of slower power demand growth and the successful expansion of renewable energy.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p></p><p>[1] Original report in Chinese media available here: <a href="http://news.bjx.com.cn/html/20160324/718971.shtml">http://news.bjx.com.cn/html/20160324/718971.shtml</a></p><p></p><p>[2] Based on data from ‘Boom and Bust’, an upcoming report by Greenpeace, CoalSwarm and Sierra Club, to be released 30 March 2016.</p><p></p><p>[3] From Greenpeace East Asia’s report ‘Is China Doubling Down on its Coal Power Bubble’, available here: <a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/publications/reports/climate-energy/2016/coal-power-bubble-update/">http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/publications/reports/climate-energy/2016/coal-power-bubble-update/</a></p><p></p><p><strong>Media contact:</strong></p><p></p><p>Tom Baxter,<br />International Communications Officer, Greenpeace East Asia,<br />email: tom.baxter@greenpeace.org<br />phone: +86 188 1134 4861</p><p></p><p>Lauri Myllyvirta<br />Senior Campaigner, Coal, Greenpeace<br />email: lauri.myllyvirta@greenpeace.org<br />phone: +86 157 1002 1563</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace International Press Desk<br />email: pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org,<br />phone: +31 (0) 20 718 2470 (available 24 hours)</p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/SciB9NgQSfE" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Thu, 24 Mar 2016 08:20:00 +0100climate & energyamcgurkhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/climate-energy/2016/China-begins-to-suspend-coal-fired-power-plant-approvals-Greenpeace-response/e99e124c-b8da-42d5-9c11-8362367bed36http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/aHC__k6yO6w/45% of China’s coal-fired power plants in areas of ‘water over-withdrawal’, GreenpeaceBeijing, 22 March, 2016 – 45% of coal-fired power plants in China are located in areas of ‘water over-withdrawal’, a ground-breaking Greenpeace study of the coal industry’s impact on the global water crisis shows. Every year these power plants consume quantities of water equivalent to the basic requirements of 186 million people. Moreover, 48% of proposed coal-fired power plants in China are located in the same ‘water over-withdrawal’ areas. Greenpeace urges the Chinese government to act immediately to secure China’s water resources and prevent further ecosystem damage.<p>“Not only does coal pollute our skies and fuel climate change, it also deprives us of life’s most basic need, water,” said Harri Lammi, a Greenpeace senior global campaigner on coal.</p><p></p><p>“In China an overlapping of rich coal reserves, water scarcity and fragile ecosystems makes the problem especially pronounced. Yet China continues to expand coal power plants in these regions. This must be halted.”</p><p></p><p>The report, <em>The Great Water Grab</em>, is the result of collaboration between Greenpeace and Dutch engineering consultancy Witteveen+Bos. It utilises data from Platts World Electric Power Plant Database and the World Resources Institute’s Aqueduct water risk analysis model. The study maps areas of water stress and current and proposed power plants and coal mines and is the first global plant-by-plant study of the coal industry’s current and future water demand.</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace East Asia selected the Kuye River basin, located in China’s ‘energy golden triangle’ and an important tributary of the Yellow River, as a case study for China’s water-coal conflict. Fieldwork shows that the Kuye River’s water flow has already dropped and now runs only intermittently. It is also estimated that by 2020 the river basin’s coal industry alone will consume 105% of the whole basin’s projected total water supply [1]. Furthermore, in non-flood season water quality in the basin has been graded as ‘Inferior V’, below the quality considered suitable for agricultural use.</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace East Asia urges the Chinese government to call an immediate moratorium on coal industry projects in areas of water over-withdrawal and transition towards renewable energy sources, which consume little to no water. Moreover, China’s reduction of over-capacity in the coal industry should prioritise those power plants located in water over-withdrawal areas.</p><p></p><p align="left">[1] Projected total annual water volume as according to the EIA report of the Integrated Plan of the Kuye River Basin, <a href="http://www.yellowriver.gov.cn/zwzc/gzgb/gg/201403/P020140326615862181717.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.yellowriver.gov.cn/zwzc/gzgb/gg/201403/P020140326615862181717.pdf</a></p><p></p><p><strong>Notes to editor:</strong></p><p></p><p align="left">1)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <em>‘The Great Water Grab: How the coal industry is deepening the global water crisis</em>’ can be downloaded here: <a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/thegreatwatergrab" target="_blank">http://www.greenpeace.org/thegreatwatergrab</a></p><p></p><p align="left">2)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; A media briefing on Greenpeace East Asia’s Kuye River case study can be downloaded here: <a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/Global/eastasia/publications/reports/climate-energy/2016/GPEA_How%20Coal%20Production%20Aggravates%20the%20Global%20Water%20Crisis_FN.pdf" target="_blank">http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/Global/eastasia/publications/reports/climate-energy/2016/GPEA_How%20Coal%20Production%20Aggravates%20the%20Global%20Water%20Crisis_FN.pdf</a></p><p></p><p align="left">3)&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Images of the Kuye River case study can be downloaded here: <a href="http://photo.greenpeace.org/collection/27MZIFJ6DF0WI" target="_blank">http://photo.greenpeace.org/collection/27MZIFJ6DF0WI</a></p><p></p><p><strong>Media contact:</strong></p><p></p><p>Tom Baxter,<br />International Communications Officer, Greenpeace East Asia,<br />email: tom.baxter@greenpeace.org<br />phone: +86 188 1134 4861</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace International Press Desk<br />email: pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org,<br />phone: +31 (0) 20 718 2470 (available 24 hours)</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace stands for positive change through action to defend the natural world and promote peace. We are a non-profit organisation with a presence in 40 countries. To maintain its independence, Greenpeace does not accept donations from governments or corporations but relies on contributions from individual supporters and foundation grants.<a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia" target="_blank">www.greenpeace.org/eastasia</a></p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/aHC__k6yO6w" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Wed, 23 Mar 2016 04:15:00 +0100climate & energyTom Baxterhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/climate-energy/2016/45-of-Chinas-coal-fired-power-plants-in-areas-of-water-over-withdrawal-Greenpeace/59d98c1b-8f70-4f63-b48e-9c36c484d28dhttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/ROLMmIprdJQ/Greenpeace response to the Chinese government’s MEP press conferenceBeijing, 11 March, 2016 – In today’s Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP) press conference, Minister Chen Jining expressed an encouraging outlook and laid out a comprehensive range of targets for the MEP. Greenpeace welcomes this vision, but urges the government to strengthen supervision of policy and to further promote public participation as a key part of China’s efforts to protect the environment.<p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>“Today’s press conference showed again that the MEP is serious about tackling both the pressing pollution problems and also some of the deeper causes of China’s environmental problems. Loopholes and enforcement problems are still rife, however, and Greenpeace urges stronger supervision, greater transparency and an increased role for the public in order to strengthen China’s efforts to protect the environment,” said Greenpeace East Asia’s deputy program director, Li Yan.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>The government’s emphasis on holding local officials accountable for environmental protection and on intervention and prevention in the form of Environmental Impact Assessments and “red lines” is promising. Greenpeace hopes to see tighter measures taking effect soon. A more proactive MEP could also have a significant impact.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Greenpeace notes the emphasis Minister Chen placed on environmental law and public interest litigation, which Greenpeace has long </span><a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/news/blog/seeds-of-change-cadmium-rice/blog/52829/"><span>encouraged</span></a><span> as a means to ensure environmental protection. &nbsp;</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>As the Chinese economy enters its ‘New Normal’ of slower economic growth, Minister Chen’s emphasis on environmental protection as inseparable from good quality economic growth is another positive sign from the press conference.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Greenpeace urges the government to ensure strict supervision of environmental policy and encourages the greater expansion of transparency and public participation in the protection of China’s environment.</span></p><p></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>Greenpeace notes the below important areas raised in the press conference:</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Air Pollution</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr">Minister Chen noted improvements in air quality in 74 key cities since 2014, a positive trend also shown in Greenpeace’s <a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/climate-energy/2016/Q4-City-Rankings-2015/">independent analysis</a> of air quality across China. However, air pollution across China is still a serious issue. Greenpeace continues to urge the government to introduce a national coal consumption cap in order to quicken the rate of improvement.</p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Coal</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>‘Ultra-low emission’ technology was noted as a way to clean up the energy sector. Greenpeace points out, however, that this technology cannot guarantee continuous and stable ‘ultra-low emissions’. Moreover, an </span><a href="http://energydesk.greenpeace.org/2015/12/16/china-clean-coal-isnt-clean/"><span>investigation</span></a><span> by Greenpeace has shown that numerous loopholes exist in ‘ultra low emission’ supervision. Regardless, ‘ultra low emission’ technology is not an effective means to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and Greenpeace calls on the government to focus on renewable energy as the energy source of the future.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Water</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>The safety of drinking water was extensively discussed by Minister Chen. Water is the next major environmental challenge for China to tackle. Greenpeace will continue to monitor the implementation of</span><span> </span><span>China’s Clean Water Action Plan and calls for deeper public participation in the plan’s implementation</span><span>.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Ecological Red Lines and Biodiversity</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Minister Chen emphasised the urgency of securing ecological redlines and protecting biodiversity, both of which have been frequently undermined by economic activity in the past. While Minister Chen pledges to strengthen supervision of protected areas such as nature reserves, a more precautionary approach with an emphasis on the planning process is desired. Such a move would require top-down institutional change.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Agricultural and Rural Pollution</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>The prevention of agricultural pollution in rural areas was stated as one of the MEP’s most important objectives for the 13</span><span>th</span><span> FYP period. Greenpeace </span><a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/news/stories/food-agriculture/2009/fertiliser-algae-taihu/"><span>investigations</span></a><span> have shown that agricultural, rather than industrial, pollution is the major challenge to the environment in these areas. In particular, Greenpeace calls on the government to pay closer attention to the link between the agricultural chemical inputs and freshwater lake pollution.</span></p><p></p><p><strong>Media contact:</strong></p><p></p><p>Tom Baxter<br />International Communications Officer, Greenpeace East Asia<br />email:&nbsp;<a href="mailto:tom.baxter@greenpeace.org" target="_blank">tom.baxter@greenpeace.org</a><br />phone:&nbsp;<a href="tel:%2B86%20188%201134%204861" target="_blank">+86 188 1134 4861</a></p><p></p><p>Greenpeace International Press Desk<br />email:&nbsp;<a href="mailto:pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org" target="_blank">pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org</a><br />phone:&nbsp;<a href="tel:%2B31%20%280%29%2020%20718%202470" target="_blank">+31 (0) 20 718 2470</a>&nbsp;(available 24 hours)</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace stands for positive change through action to defend the natural world and promote peace. We are a non-profit organisation with a presence in 40 countries. To maintain its independence, Greenpeace does not accept donations from governments or corporations but relies on contributions from individual supporters and foundation grants.<a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia" target="_blank">www.greenpeace.org/eastasia</a></p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/ROLMmIprdJQ" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Fri, 11 Mar 2016 08:36:00 +0100other issuesTom Baxterhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/others/20161/Greenpeace-response-to-the-Chinese-governments-MEP-press-conference/f24f95e3-8343-4650-b291-035b84f27d74http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/h0gKk-hVne0/China’s CO2 emissions continued to fall in 2015 – Greenpeace responseBeijing, 29 February, 2016 – Statistics released today by the National Bureau of Statistics show that a fall in China’s coal consumption and CO2 emissions continued for a second year in a row 2015. The fall in coal use over past two years was equal to Japan’s total yearly coal consumption. The trend is the result of falling heavy industry output and a globally unprecedented uptake of renewable energy.<p>“These statistics show that China is on track to far surpass its Paris climate targets, which is great news for everyone.”</p><p></p><p>“However, the trend is not moving as fast as it could. The introduction of a national coal consumption cap in the upcoming 13<sup>th</sup> Five Year Plan would quicken the pace of CO2’s decline, as well as help to bring clean and healthy air to the citizens of China,” said senior global campaigner on coal, Lauri Myllyvirta.</p><p></p><p>2015 saw CO2 emissions fall by 1-2% following a slight fall in 2014, according to Greenpeace analysis of the numbers. Key to this fall were a 2-4% decline in coal consumption and 5.3% fall in cement output, in part caused by a contraction in heavy industry such as steel and concrete.</p><p></p><p>At the same time, China’s wind and solar generating capacity broke records this year growing by a stunning 34% and 74% respectively, allowing growth in wind and solar power generation alone to meet the whole year’s electricity demand growth for the first time in history.&nbsp;</p><p></p><p>Similarly, increase in non-fossil energy was equal to growth in total energy use for the first time on record.</p><p></p><p>However, a steadily worsening overcapacity problem in coal power and heavy industry threatens to complicate the transition to renewable energy sources. [1]</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace East Asia calls on the Chinese government to quicken the pace of change by addressing the overcapacity issue and introducing a national coal consumption cap in the 13<sup>th</sup> Five Year Plan.</p><p></p><p>[1] A Greenpeace East Asia report published November 2015 revealed the extent of the overcapacity problem in the coal fired power sector in the first three quarters of 2015. The report can be read <a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/publications/reports/climate-energy/climate-energy-2015/doubling-down/">here</a>. It will be updated with whole year statistics on Wednesday 2 March 2016.</p><p></p><p><strong>Notes to editors:&nbsp;</strong></p><p></p><p>See key statistics from the release<a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/Global/eastasia/publications/reports/climate-energy/2016/Key%20numbers%20from%20China%20stat%20communique%202015.pdf"> here</a>.&nbsp;</p><p></p><p><strong>Media contact:</strong></p><p></p><p>Tom Baxter<br /> International Communications Officer, Greenpeace East Asia<br /> email:&nbsp;tom.baxter@greenpeace.org<br /> phone: +86 188 1134 4861</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace International Press Desk<br /> Email:&nbsp;pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org<br /> phone: +31 (0) 20 718 2470 (available 24 hours)</p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/h0gKk-hVne0" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Mon, 29 Feb 2016 04:18:00 +0100climate & energyamcgurkhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/climate-energy/2016/Chinas-CO2-emissions-continued-to-fall-in-2015--Greenpeace-response/c336d05b-31b5-464c-bc68-cedce85b2c08http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/3Zgy2SofuRk/Suspected Illegal Construction of Coal Chemical Plants in northwest ChinaGreenpeace, Beijing 14 Sept 2015 – A Greenpeace East Asia investigation has revealed evidence that 15% of all modern coal chemical projects currently under construction, or 8 out of 53, are likely proceeding without the required permission from the Ministry of Environmental Protection (MEP). The eight offending projects are all located in arid and environmentally fragile regions of northwest China.<p>“Coal chemical companies in western China are acting as if they have been given the green light to exploit the region’s riches. In fact, sometimes their operations are clearly illegal and pose a huge risk to an already delicate environment,” said Head of Climate and Energy Campaign, Li Yan. “While it’s encouraging that policies aim to apply ‘the strictest environmental standards’ in the coal chemical industry, after a series of pollution scandals, such blatant disregard of the law will have to be tackled first.”</p><p></p><p>The investigation shows:</p><p></p><ul><p></p><li>Eight coal chemical projects currently under construction in China are suspected to be proceeding without the required approval from the Ministry of Environmental Protection.</li><p></p><li>These projects are all large scale projects, located in Xinjiang (3), Inner Mongolia (3), Shaanxi (1) and Shanxi (1).</li><p></p><li>In July 2015 the Environmental Impact Assessment report of the Yili-Xintian project in Xinjiang and the Lu’an project in Shanxi were denied approval by the MEP, a prerequisite for construction. Before this decision had been made, the Yili-Xintian had already illegally gathered investment amounting to 8 billion RMB completed 80% of construction. Lu’an project had gathered 3.2 billion RMB of investments and began construction, with a plan to begin production by end of 2015.</li><p></p></ul><p></p><p>During the investigation Greenpeace noted a severe lack of publicly available information on the permission application procedures of coal chemical plants. Greenpeace calls on the MEP to make such information fully available in order to ensure better monitoring of the industry and more effective enforcement of the law.</p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/3Zgy2SofuRk" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Tue, 26 Jan 2016 03:33:00 +0100climate & energyamcgurkhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/climate-energy/2015/suspected-illegal-construction/dd013f15-35c3-46c5-8184-273262a9f17chttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/1NBNABcvPEE/Greenpeace: China saw average PM2.5 levels fall by 10% in 2015, but 80% of cities still fail to meet national air quality standardsBeijing, 20 January 2016 - Greenpeace East Asia’s 2015 annual city rankings show that average PM2.5 concentration in 189 cities around China fell by 10% compared to 2014 levels. However, 80% of a set of 366 cities in China still fail to meet the national standard on air quality. Moreover, the smog experienced by Beijing and other cities across northern China this winter is a reminder of the steps which must be taken to clean China’s skies. With the announcement of the 13th Five Year Plan, China’s long-term policy blueprint, just around the corner in March, now is an opportune moment for the government to take decisive action on air pollution via a nationwide cap on the consumption of coal, China’s number one source of air pollutants.<p>“Despite Beijing’s choking winter of red alerts, data from 2015 clearly shows a continued positive trend in Beijing and across the country. However, air quality across China is still a major health hazard”, said climate and energy campaigner Dong Liansai.</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace’s findings show that Beijing, Guangzhou and Shenzhen all saw decreases in annual average PM2.5 concentrations in 2015, while Shanghai saw a slight increase of 3.14%. The Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region saw average annual PM2.5 levels fall to 77.1µg /m3, down from 92.6µg /m3 in 2014 and already approaching its 2017 target of 73µg/m<sup>3</sup>, set by the NDRC in December.</p><p></p><p>However, Q4 data for Beijing and other areas of northern China show that this winter experienced significantly higher levels of PM2.5 concentration than in 2013 and 2014. Baoding in Hebei province saw a total of 35 days of heavy pollution, while Beijing saw 26 such days. Greenpeace East Asia research shows that the principal reason for this higher frequency of smog in Beijing and surrounding areas this winter was wind and humidity conditions. Though weather conditions help smog develop, the origin of the pollution remains heavy coal burning across northern China.</p><p></p><p>“With the WHO calling air pollution a ‘global public health emergency’,<a title="" name="_ftnref1" href="file:///C:/Users/Tom%20Baxter/Documents/2016/01_January/City%20Ranking/PR/FINAL/2015%20City%20Ranking_PR_FINAL.docx#_ftn1">[1]</a> China’s regular ‘airpocalypses’ and Beijing’s red alerts in December are a stark reminder of what needs to be done: control coal consumption. The upcoming five year plan offers a golden opportunity to put another nail in the coffin of king coal,” said Dong Liansai.</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace East Asia calls on the Chinese government to implement a national coal consumption cap in the upcoming 13th Five Year Plan, due to be agreed on this March. Moreover, PM2.5 targets in the three key regions of Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei, Yangtze River Delta and Pearl River Delta should be re-addressed based on performance shown in the mid-term review of the <em>Air Pollution Prevention and Control Action Pla</em><em>n</em>, and ambition increased accordingly. Regional PM2.5 targets should also be expanded to other regions.</p><p></p><p><strong>Notes to editor:</strong></p><p></p><p>See Greenpeace 2015 City Rankings media briefing <a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/Global/eastasia/publications/reports/climate-energy/2015/GPEA%202015%20City%20Rankings_briefing_int.pdf">here</a></p><p></p><p><strong>Media contact:</strong></p><p></p><p>Tom Baxter,</p><p></p><p>International Communications Officer, Greenpeace East Asia,</p><p></p><p>email:&nbsp;<a href="mailto:tom.baxter@greenpeace.org" target="_blank">tom.baxter@greenpeace.org</a></p><p></p><p>phone:&nbsp;<a href="tel:%2B86%20188%201134%204861" target="_blank">+86 188 1134 4861</a></p><p></p><p>&nbsp;Greenpeace International Press Desk</p><p></p><p>email:&nbsp;<a href="mailto:pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org" target="_blank">pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org</a>,</p><p></p><p>phone:&nbsp;<a href="tel:%2B31%20%280%29%2020%20718%202470" target="_blank">+31 (0) 20 718 2470</a>&nbsp; (available 24 hours)</p><p></p><div><br clear="all" /><hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" /><p></p><div id="ftn1"><p></p><p><a title="" name="_ftn1" href="file:///C:/Users/Tom%20Baxter/Documents/2016/01_January/City%20Ranking/PR/FINAL/2015%20City%20Ranking_PR_FINAL.docx#_ftnref1">[1]</a> http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jan/16/world-heslth-organisation-figures-deadly-pollution-levels-world-biggest-cities</p><p></p></div><p></p></div><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/1NBNABcvPEE" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Wed, 20 Jan 2016 02:00:00 +0100climate & energytbaxterhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/climate-energy/2016/Q4-City-Rankings-2015/d8893f82-53d5-4504-be99-cf839ae8eb22http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/arAJo5xTDQY/China declares no new coal mines for next three years - Greenpeace responseBeijing, 6 January 2016 - China announced plans recently to halt new coal mine approvals for the next three years, and close 1,000 coal mines as part of its fight against air pollution. The announcement, made in a speech by the Head of China’s National Energy Administration at the annual meeting of energy planners, also includes plans to further cut coal’s share in China’s total energy mix and increase alternative energy sources.<p dir="ltr"><span>“It's an important and also inevitable step as China moves away from its coal addiction. The demand for coal has been dropping in the last two years, making existing coal mines increasingly difficult to run,” said Li Yan, Head of Climate &amp; Energy in Beijing, Greenpeace East Asia. “The next step is to put a national cap on the production and use of coal in China’s next five year plan starting this year.”</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>“Not only is this a nail in the coffin for king coal, but it sends a clear signal to investors and leaders around the world to immediately speed up the transition to renewables."</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>This announcement sends another signal that the Chinese government is serious about tackling coal’s impact on worsening air quality in big cities, as well as its impact on water shortages and ecological degradation in vulnerable land-locked regions. In November last year, China </span><a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/11/11/us-china-joint-announcement-climate-change" target="_blank"><span>announced</span></a><span> its intention to peak CO2 emissions by 2030 at the latest and to ramp up clean energy use to around 20% by the same year.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>Media contact:</strong></p><p></p><p>Tom Baxter,<br />International Communications Officer, Greenpeace East Asia,<br />email: tom.baxter@greenpeace.org<br />phone: +86 188 1134 4861<br /> <br />Greenpeace International Press Desk<br />email: pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org,<br />phone: +31 (0) 20 718 2470 (available 24 hours)</p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/arAJo5xTDQY" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Wed, 06 Jan 2016 04:30:00 +0100climate & energyTom Baxterhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/climate-energy/2015/China-declares-no-new-coal-mines-for-next-three-years---Greenpeace-response1/e7ddea16-6617-44fe-94a6-833c60356a0ehttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/KvJtkSd9SaI/Greenpeace sampling finds 93% of corn grown in China’s ‘breadbasket’ province of illegal GE strain.Beijing, 6 January, 2016 – A Greenpeace East Asia investigation into corn production in Liaoning Province, one of China’s major breadbaskets, has found that 93% of random field samples and 20 of 21 samples from grain markets and supermarkets in the area tested positive for illegal genetically engineered (GE) contamination. The commercial production of GE staple crops in China is strictly illegal. Greenpeace calls for an urgent investigation into this large scale GE contamination, for the implementation of measures to prevent its reoccurrence and for the reallocation of resources into promoting ecological agriculture as a solution to China’s food needs.<p>“The scale of GE contamination is truly shocking,” said Li Yifang, Head of Food and Agriculture Campaign, “China has strict and clear regulations on GE, and the ongoing production of GE corn in Liaoning province breaks these regulations on multiple levels.”</p><p></p><p>The investigation was carried out from May to December 2015. A combination of rapid testing, sampling and laboratory testing by a third party was used. Samples were taken from five corn growing counties in Liaoning Province from the three main stages of corn production; agricultural seed supplies (supply), fields (production), and local grain silos, markets and supermarkets (distribution). All stages showed a high level of GE contamination. The patents of the discovered GE corn strains belong to international companies Monsanto, Syngenta, Du Pont Pioneer and Dow Chemical.</p><p></p><p>China’s strict GE regulations only permit the import of GE crops for use as raw materials. At present, no strains of GE corn are allowed to be commercially produced in China. Moreover, products containing imported GE crops must be labelled in order to ensure consumers’ right to know and right to choose.<a title="" name="_ftnref1" href="file:///C:/Users/Tom%20Baxter/Documents/12_December/GE/PR/FINAL/Greenpeace,%20illegal%20GE_PR_final.docx#_ftn1">[1]</a> The production of illegal GE corn, which has most likely already entered the supply chain, is in direct violation of this right.</p><p></p><p>Illegal GE corn cultivation also poses a major risk to local ecosystems, exposing native plants to new competition and the risk of contamination via gene flow.</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace concludes that an extremely lax and disorganised seed market management system in China has allowed for the production and distribution of illegal GE corn.</p><p></p><p>“The government must immediately investigate the origins of this large scale GE contamination and implement measures to ensure that this never happens again,” said Li Yifang.</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace also calls on the government to establish a regular system of seed inspection before the sowing period each year and to establish a strict and comprehensive system to supervise research, breeding and cultivation of GE products. The government should exercise extreme caution in the commercialisation of any GE crops.</p><p></p><p>GE is not a solution to food security or safety. Greenpeace urges the Chinese government to shift resources to the promotion of ecological agriculture, a more sustainable and safe form of food production.</p><p></p><p><strong>Images:&nbsp; </strong>http://photo.greenpeace.org/shoot/27MZIFJ6TDC43</p><p></p><p><strong>Media contact:</strong></p><p></p><p>Tom Baxter,<br />International Communications Officer, Greenpeace East Asia,<br />email: tom.baxter@greenpeace.org<br />phone: +86 188 1134 4861<br /> <br />Greenpeace International Press Desk<br />email: pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org,<br />phone: +31 (0) 20 718 2470 (available 24 hours)</p><p></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace stands for positive change through action to defend the natural world and promote peace. We are a non-profit organisation with a presence in 40 countries. To maintain its independence, Greenpeace does not accept donations from governments or corporations but relies on contributions from individual supporters and foundation grants.<a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia" target="_blank">www.greenpeace.org/eastasia</a></p><p></p><div><br clear="all" /><hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" /><p></p><div id="ftn1"><p></p><p><a title="" name="_ftn1" href="file:///C:/Users/Tom%20Baxter/Documents/12_December/GE/PR/FINAL/Greenpeace,%20illegal%20GE_PR_final.docx#_ftnref1">[1]</a> ‘Regulation of Labelling of Agricultural Genetically Modified Organisms’, Article 3&nbsp;</p><p></p></div><p></p></div><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/KvJtkSd9SaI" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Wed, 06 Jan 2016 02:50:00 +0100food & agricultureTom Baxterhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/food-agriculture/2015/93-GE-corn-contamination/27eccce2-3113-4223-8f9c-1978bd960fa0http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/dUikJDL2-GY/ Greenpeace calls for a ‘2034 Nuclear-free Hong Kong’ emissions reduction plan3 November 2015, Hong Kong-The 21st Conference of the Parties (COP21) Climate Summit will be held on 30 November in Paris. The UN has pointed out that countries' current emissions reduction targets will not be enough to stop the world going over the 2 degrees warming threshold. As one of Asia's developed cities, Hong Kong also bears a responsibility to tackle climate change. Greenpeace is urging the Hong Kong government to formulate a new climate change strategy by adopting the ‘2034 Nuclear-free Hong Kong’ emissions reduction plan. We believe that if Hong Kong focuses on energy efficiency and developing renewable energy by 2034, when Daya Bay’s contract to supply energy to Hong Kong will expire, the city can quit nuclear power and still be able to reduce carbon emissions by about 30% compared with 2005 levels.<p>Greenpeace senior campaigner Frances Yeung said:&nbsp; "As a developed city, Hong Kong should move faster on reducing emissions. Japan’s Fukushima nuclear accident was further proof of the dangers of nuclear power and showed that nuclear is not a solution to climate change. The current trend is moving towards energy saving and renewable energy development. The government has to come up with plans to reduce emissions without nuclear power.”</p><p></p><p>In 2010, the Hong Kong government's public consultation on its Climate Change Strategy and Action Agenda pledged 2020 emissions would be 19-33% lower than 2005 levels. However the main strategy suggested to achieve this was an adjustment to the energy mix, which would only bring about the lower 19% reduction, a target which is not aggressive enough.</p><p></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p></p><p>Daya Bay's contract to supply Hong Kong with electricity ends in 2034. By this time the plant will have been operating for 41 years, exceedingthe usual lifespan of 40 years for a nuclear power plant. On the assumptions that Hong Kong will not build any more coal power plants, the policy of using gas for local electricity generation remains unchanged, and existing coal power stations will be retired, Greenpeace believes that as long as total energy consumption is reduced by 20% by 2034, and renewable energy supplies 10% of our electricity needs, then Hong Kong will be able to reduce its carbon emissions by 34% over 2005 levels and still quit nuclear (Please see Attachment).</p><p></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p></p><p>The government's energy-saving blueprint will reduce energy use in 2025 by 10% from today's levels; that's an average drop of 1% per year. As long as this downward trend continues until 2034 then our ‘nuclear-free Hong Kong’ emissions reduction plan will be half way there. But the energy-saving blueprint lists no specific measures to achieve this. To make that further 10% drop in total energy consumption, the government must develop countermeasures, such as</p><p></p><p>obliging owners of existing buildings to implement energy efficiency measures after conducting energy audits and setting up funds to help owners save energy.</p><p></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p></p><p>Hong Kong also has the potential to develop renewable energy, such as decentralized solar power, but there is a lack of policy support. A study by City University last year, <em>An analysis of potential applications of wide-scale solar energy in Hong Kong</em>, estimated that installing solar panels on an area equivalent to 30% of Hong Kong’s developed region, would supply 30% of Hong Kong’s electricity demand&nbsp; (Please see note 1). The Consumer Council pointed out that Hong Kong has the potential to develop renewable energy, but it lacks favorable conditions. The government should develop clear objectives and policies on renewable energy, such as feed-in tariffs to promote renewable energy development.</p><p></p><p>Frances Yeung stressed that the government must learn from Japan’s Fukushima nuclear accident. The ‘2034 Nuclear-free Hong Kong’ emissions reduction plan is the starting point for Hong Kong to tackle climate change. Hong Kong must develop more long-term and more aggressive emissions reduction targets. She said all nations at the Paris Summit must agree on a strong mechanism that will be regularly reviewed to improve reduction targets otherwise global temperatures cannot be kept under the 2 degrees warming threshold and we will suffer the worst impacts of climate change.</p><p></p><p><strong>Media contacts</strong></p><p></p><p>Greenpeace Senior Campaigner Frances Yeung<br /> Tel: 2854 8303 / 9479 0416 <br /> Email:&nbsp; frayeung@greenpeace.org</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace Communications Officer Ray Yeung<br />Tel: 2854 8376 / 9609 5714<br />Email: ray.yeung@greenpeace.org</p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/dUikJDL2-GY" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Fri, 04 Dec 2015 09:36:00 +0100climate & energyamcgurkhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/climate-energy/2015/COP21-Hong-Kong-Nuclear/f73392ee-8820-4763-aafb-061f2386f54fhttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/K2bVmSInWwc/Greenpeace: China could lead global fight against illegal logging in the Congo BasinBeijing, November 24, 2015 – The transformation of the Congo Basin timber trade into one significantly influenced by twenty key Chinese trading companies offers a golden opportunity to contribute significantly to tackle illegal logging in the world’s second largest rainforest, according to a new Greenpeace East Asia and Greenpeace Africa report, Opportunity Knocks. <p>“The health of the second ‘lungs of the earth’ is the responsibility of the whole world. But it is now China that holds the key to reigning in the illegal logging trade which does them so much damage,” said Rashid Kang, Head of China Forest Campaign, Greenpeace East Asia.</p><p></p><p>The Congo Basin rainforest holds 53% of Africa’s total carbon stocks.<a title="" name="_ftnref1" href="file:///C:/Users/Tom%20Baxter/Documents/11_November/Congo%20Forest%20%E5%88%9A%E6%9E%9C%E7%9B%86%E5%9C%B0%E6%A3%AE%E6%9E%97/PR/FINAL/Greenpeace_China%20could%20lead%20global%20fight%20against%20illegal%20logging%20in%20the%20Congo%20Basin_IPR,%201123_FINAL.docx#_ftn1">[1]</a> Its preservation is an important <em>Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation</em>&nbsp;(REDD) component in the lead up to the COP21 climate talks. Yet it is increasingly under threat from forest destruction, and attempts to control this are consistently undermined by widespread illegal practices and corruption in forestry sectors throughout the region.<a title="" name="_ftnref2" href="file:///C:/Users/Tom%20Baxter/Documents/11_November/Congo%20Forest%20%E5%88%9A%E6%9E%9C%E7%9B%86%E5%9C%B0%E6%A3%AE%E6%9E%97/PR/FINAL/Greenpeace_China%20could%20lead%20global%20fight%20against%20illegal%20logging%20in%20the%20Congo%20Basin_IPR,%201123_FINAL.docx#_ftn2">[2]</a></p><p></p><p>&nbsp;In 2012 China surpassed the European Union as the largest importer of Congo Basin wood. By 2014 the trade was concentrated in the hands of a small group of influential Chinese companies, the largest 20 of whom accounted for 71% of all logs exported from the region. Eight of these companies are state owned. &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</p><p></p><p><em>Opportunity Knocks </em>includes analysis of 11 years of Chinese customs data records and documents the results of interviews conducted by Greenpeace East Asia with the most important Chinese importers of Congo Basin logs. It concludes that these companies play a game of calculated ignorance and are unwilling to improve their due-diligence procedures.</p><p></p><p>The report also reveals that three of the companies have their supply chain contaminated with illegal wood or are directly involved in illegal logging activities. Given the size of the trade and the quantity of illegal wood exported from the Congo Basin, this is likely just the tip of the iceberg.</p><p></p><p>Unlike fellow key markets, the US and the EU, China does not yet have binding legislation that prohibits illegal timber being placed on its markets. The government currently relies on companies to self-regulate their own buying processes and supply chains.</p><p></p><p>“There is an urgent need for China to introduce mandatory measures akin to the European Timber Regulation and US Lacey Act,” said Victorine Che Thoener, Project Leader, Congo Basin Forest Cluster, for Greenpeace Africa. “With this, we could see historic steps forward in the fight against illegal logging and a strengthening of Africa-China partnership.”</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace East Asia and Greenpeace Africa call on the Chinese government to introduce strong legislation to prohibit the import of illegally sourced timber. As an interim measure, the government should demand that Chinese importers of Congo Basin logs, particularly the 20 most influential, strictly follow due diligence and ensure the legality of their operations. China should also strengthen its cooperation with the countries of the Congo Basin, the EU and the US to clean up the global supply chain and stop the trade in illegal timber. Meanwhile, the governments of the Congo Basin should put in place stronger measures to deal with illegal logging in their respective countries and work closely with international partners to monitor and combat the exportation of illegal logs.</p><p></p><p><strong>Notes to editors:</strong></p><p></p><p>To read Opportunity Knocks and its full appendix click <a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/publications/reports/forests/2015/opportunity-knocks/">here</a></p><p></p><p><strong>Media contact:</strong></p><p></p><p>Tom Baxter,<br />International Communications Officer, Greenpeace East Asia,<br />email: tom.baxter@greenpeace.org<br />phone: +86 188 1134 4861<br /> <br />Greenpeace International Press Desk<br />Email: pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org,<br />phone: +31 (0) 20 718 2470 (available 24 hours)</p><p></p><p><strong>&nbsp;</strong></p><p></p><p>Greenpeace stands for positive change through action to defend the natural world and promote peace. We are a non-profit organisation with a presence in 40 countries. To maintain its independence, Greenpeace does not accept donations from governments or corporations but relies on contributions from individual supporters and foundation grants.<a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia" target="_blank">www.greenpeace.org/eastasia</a></p><p></p><div><br clear="all" /><hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" /><p></p><div id="ftn1"><p></p><p><a title="" name="_ftn1" href="file:///C:/Users/Tom%20Baxter/Documents/11_November/Congo%20Forest%20%E5%88%9A%E6%9E%9C%E7%9B%86%E5%9C%B0%E6%A3%AE%E6%9E%97/PR/FINAL/Greenpeace_China%20could%20lead%20global%20fight%20against%20illegal%20logging%20in%20the%20Congo%20Basin_IPR,%201123_FINAL.docx#_ftnref1">[1]</a> Figure was calculated based on published statistics in FAO study<a href="http://www.fao.org/3/a-i4808e.pdf"><em>Global Forest Research Assessment 2015 – Desk Reference</em></a>.</p><p></p></div><p></p><div id="ftn2"><p></p><p><a title="" name="_ftn2" href="file:///C:/Users/Tom%20Baxter/Documents/11_November/Congo%20Forest%20%E5%88%9A%E6%9E%9C%E7%9B%86%E5%9C%B0%E6%A3%AE%E6%9E%97/PR/FINAL/Greenpeace_China%20could%20lead%20global%20fight%20against%20illegal%20logging%20in%20the%20Congo%20Basin_IPR,%201123_FINAL.docx#_ftnref2">[2]</a> According to Chatham House research, as a percentage of all logging in the region, illegal logging accounts for around 65% in Cameroon (see <a href="https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/files/chathamhouse/field/field_document/20150121IllegalLoggingCameroonHoare.pdf">here</a>), 90% in the Democratic Republic of Congo (see <a href="https://www.chathamhouse.org/sites/files/chathamhouse/field/field_document/201404DRC.pdf">here</a>), and around 70% in the Republic of Congo (see <a href="http://indicators.chathamhouse.org/sites/files/reports/Lawson_Republic_of_Congo_PP_2014.pdf">here</a>).</p><p></p></div><p></p></div><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/K2bVmSInWwc" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Tue, 24 Nov 2015 02:02:00 +0100forestsTom Baxterhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/forests/2015/Greenpeace-China-could-lead-global-fight-against-illegal-logging-in-the-Congo-Basin/009ed312-ec49-4ff3-92d4-0a071ca5790fhttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/rmYuLGV2i18/Greenpeace report estimates 13th Five Year Plan period could see 700 billion RMB wasted on coal fired electricityBeijing, November 18, 2015 – A collaborative report by Greenpeace East Asia and North China Electric Power University reveals that up to 700 billion RMB could be invested in the coal power industry over the 13th five year plan period, in spite of an already serious overcapacity problem. The report, Coal Power Overcapacity and the Investment Bubble in China, analyses trends in coal power during the 12th Five Year Plan period and provides projections for the 13th Five Year Plan period. Based on this, it clarifies the extent of the problem, the urgency of the need to address it and makes policy recommendations accordingly.<p class="Normal1">“With the 13<sup>th</sup> Five Year Plan just around the corner, and the Paris climate talks set to begin, China needs to hit the brakes on the out of control expansion in its coal power sector,” said Greenpeace East Asia Climate and Energy campaigner Dong Liansai.&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p></p><p class="Normal1">The report’s key findings include:</p><p></p><ul><p></p><li>Current utilisation rate of power generation units is at its lowest rate since 1978, and continuing to fall.</li><p></p><li>By 2020 total overcapacity in China’s coal power sector could reach 200GW, equivalent to more than the EU’s total coal fired power plant capacity (170GW) [1].</li><p></p><li>○&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Of the five analysed provinces (Shanxi, Xinjiang, Hebei, Jiangsu and Zhejiang), Shanxi and Xinjiang will have the most severe overcapacity problem, with excesses of 21GW and 15.5GW respectively.</li><p></p><li>Total expenditure on the construction of coal fired power plants over the next five years could reach 700 billion RMB.</li><p></p><li>The overcapacity and investment problem will be an obstacle to China’s low-carbon, renewable energy transition due to capital absorption and the conflict between excess coal capacity and renewable energy.</li><p></p></ul><p></p><p class="Normal1">Greenpeace East Asia raises the following policy recommendations:</p><p></p><ul><p></p><li>The expansion of coal power plants should immediately be brought under control. No new permits for coal fired power plants should be issued during the 13<sup>th</sup> FYP period.</li><p></p><li>The construction of coal power plants that have already been issued permits should be re-evaluated within the context of the 13<sup>th</sup> FYP overall electricity development plan.&nbsp;</li><p></p><li>&nbsp;Overall power planning should be developed to coordinate different power sources and allow for renewable energy integration.</li><p></p><li>The central government should release information on power planning for the 13<sup>th</sup> FYP and establish an early warning mechanism on coal power investment in order to better inform and guide market investment.</li><p></p><li>&nbsp;Coordination between various departments should be strengthened to ensure policies are better realised.</li><p></p></ul><p></p><p class="Normal1">Notes:</p><p></p><p class="Normal1">[1] Based on end of 2014 statistics from the UDI World Electric Power Plants Database</p><p></p><p class="Normal1">&nbsp;</p><p></p><p class="Normal1"><strong>Report:</strong></p><p></p><p class="Normal1"><a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/publications/reports/climate-energy/climate-energy-2015/coal-power-overcapacity/">http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/publications/reports/climate-energy/climate-energy-2015/coal-power-overcapacity/</a></p><p></p><p><strong>Media contact:</strong></p><p></p><p>Tom Baxter,<br />International Communications Officer, Greenpeace East Asia,<br />email: tom.baxter@greenpeace.org<br />phone: +86 188 1134 4861</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace International Press Desk<br />email: pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org,<br />phone: +31 (0) 20 718 2470 (available 24 hours)</p><p></p><p align="left">&nbsp;</p><p></p><p align="left">Greenpeace stands for positive change through action to defend the natural world and promote peace. We are a non-profit organisation with a presence in 40 countries. To maintain its independence, Greenpeace does not accept donations from governments or corporations but relies on contributions from individual supporters and foundation grants. www.greenpeace.org/eastasia</p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/rmYuLGV2i18" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Wed, 18 Nov 2015 04:19:00 +0100climate & energyTom Baxterhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/climate-energy/2015/Greenpeace-report-estimates-13th-Five-Year-Plan-period-could-see-700-billion-RMB-wasted-on-coal-fired-electricity/80296365-c996-4ea3-ae02-f2f2c0403e7chttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/Ds_276yCXGk/Greenpeace: Despite falling coal consumption, China could add as many as four idle coal power plants per week.Beijing, 11 November, 2015 – A Greenpeace East Asia investigation has found that a total of 155 coal fired power plants, or four per week, have received environmental permits in the first nine months of this year. With power generation from coal falling, and an already severe overcapacity problem, the coal fired power plants will do nothing but add debt burden and idle capacity [1]. If they do go into operation, however, they would have significant environmental and health impacts. Greenpeace East Asia calls for an immediate ban on issuing permits to new coal-fired power plants.<p align="left">“As coal consumption declines and China steps up its climate commitments, state owned companies are blindly investing in a polluting, water intensive and outmoded form of power generation. Money which should be invested in renewables is simply being poured down the drain,” said Lauri Myllyvirta, Senior Global Campaigner on coal.</p><p></p><p align="left">The total expenditure on the 155 projects could reach an estimated 470 billion rmb and add up to 40% to the current debt of the state owned companies involved.</p><p></p><p align="left">If they go into operation, the power plants would have serious environmental and health consequences. The 155 plants would emit an annual quantity of CO2 equivalent to 6% of China’s current emissions and seriously exacerbate water scarcity issues. Moreover, air pollution emissions would add to cases of asthma and chronic bronchitis and increase the death toll from air pollution by an estimated 6,100 every year. This would mean 150,000 premature deaths over the typical coal power plant operating life of 24 years.</p><p></p><p align="left">Researchers at the China Electricity Council and the government-affiliated Energy Research Institute already acknowledge the overcapacity problem and have called for a slowdown in construction [2]. The lack of market forces and government attempts to boost spending mean, however, that there are still strong incentives for state-owned energy companies to invest in what will be idle power plants.</p><p></p><p align="left">Greenpeace East Asia demands that central government immediately institute a ban on issuing new permits for coal-fired power plants, review permits issued at provincial level and cancel all permits for projects in regions with overcapacity. Greenpeace East Asia also calls on the government to include a binding national coal consumption cap in the upcoming 13th Five Year Plan in order to consolidate China’s shift away from coal.</p><p></p><p align="left">Notes:</p><p></p><p align="left">1: For the first time in the almost four decades during which China has published energy statistics, utilization rate of China’s thermal generating capacity was below 50% in the first nine months of this year. Thermal power generation in 2015 will be at the same level as in 2011. Regardless, an astonishing 190GW of thermal power capacity has since been added, creating a serious overcapacity problem.</p><p></p><p align="left">2: http://uk.reuters.com/article/2015/11/06/china-coal-electricity-idUKL3N1311O920151106</p><p></p><p align="left">&nbsp;</p><p></p><p>Media contact:</p><p></p><p>Tom Baxter,</p><p></p><p>International Communications Officer, Greenpeace East Asia,</p><p></p><p>email: tom.baxter@greenpeace.org</p><p></p><p>phone: +86 188 1134 4861</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace International Press Desk</p><p></p><p>pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org,</p><p></p><p>phone: +31 (0) 20 718 2470 (available 24 hours)</p><p></p><p align="left">&nbsp;</p><p></p><p align="left">Greenpeace stands for positive change through action to defend the natural world and promote peace. We are a non-profit organisation with a presence in 40 countries. To maintain its independence, Greenpeace does not accept donations from governments or corporations but relies on contributions from individual supporters and foundation grants. www.greenpeace.org/eastasia</p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/Ds_276yCXGk" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Wed, 11 Nov 2015 01:04:00 +0100climate & energyTom Baxterhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/climate-energy/2015/Greenpeace-Despite-falling-coal-consumption-China-could-add-as-many-as-four-idle-coal-power-plants-per-week/763c996d-f8aa-4169-aa65-dbd4d756ba5ehttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/ll63BR-m7PY/Greenpeace Response to China-France Joint Statement on Climate ChangeBeijing, November 2, 2015 - A joint climate statement was released today by Chinese President Xi Jinping and French President Francois Hollande. The statement made an incremental step forward while highlighting the ambition gap the world still needs to bridge.<p dir="ltr">On the two critical components of the Paris Agreement – long term goals and an ambition mechanism - progress was made but work still needs to be done in order to raise ambition before and during the Paris conference.</p><p></p><p dir="ltr">Commenting on the joint statement, Greenpeace China Climate Policy Advisor, Li Shuo, said:</p><p></p><p dir="ltr">“Exactly four weeks before world leaders convene in Paris, it is encouraging to see the ball rolling and diplomacy nudging us a small step forward. Moreover, with the recent decline in coal consumption and robust renewable energy development, China is positioning itself at the front of climate leadership. This is drastically different from six years ago in Copenhagen.</p><p></p><p dir="ltr">However, for Paris to be a success, a far bigger stretch is needed. After waving goodbye to President Hollande tomorrow, Chinese leaders need to think hard about what more to bring to the table when they see him again in Paris at the end of this month."</p><p></p><p dir="ltr">On October 30, the UN released a new paper showing that the post-2020 pledges made so far are not sufficient to maintain a temperature rise below 2 degree C. A week earlier, the UN concluded its last round of preparatory talks in Bonn, with an unwieldy draft negotiation text that still sees conflicting views and low ambition.</p><p></p><p dir="ltr">The Executive Director of Greenpeace France, Jean-Francois Julliard, said:</p><p></p><p>“This is no time for champagne. This bilateral statement should be another springboard instead of the last word for the Paris agreement. What the world needs in Paris is a global long term vision of a 100% renewable energy supply for all by mid-century and increased ambition by countries every five years starting from now.”</p><p></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>Media contacts:</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr">Li Shuo, Senior Climate Policy Advisor, Greenpeace East Asia, <a href="tel:%2B49%20151%206194%205236" target="_blank">+49 151 6194 5236</a> (Germany), <a href="tel:%2B86%20152%200168%201548" target="_blank">+86 152 0168 1548</a> (China), <a href="mailto:li.shuo@greenpeace.org" target="_blank">li.shuo@greenpeace.org</a></p><p></p><p>Tom Baxter, International Communications Officer, Greenpeace East Asia, <a href="tel:%2B86%20188%201134%204861" target="_blank">+86 188 1134 4861</a>, <a href="mailto:tom.baxter@greenpeace.org" target="_blank">tom.baxter@greenpeace.org</a></p><p></p><p dir="ltr">Romina Sanfourche, Press Officer, Greenpeace France, <a href="tel:%2B336%2077%2080%2019%2045" target="_blank">+336 77 80 19 45</a>, <a href="mailto:romina.sanfourche@greenpeace.org" target="_blank">romina.sanfourche@greenpeace.org</a></p><p></p><p dir="ltr">&nbsp;</p><p></p><p align="left">Greenpeace stands for positive change through action to defend the natural world and promote peace. We are a non-profit organisation with a presence in 40 countries. To maintain its independence, Greenpeace does not accept donations from governments or corporations but relies on contributions from individual supporters and foundation grants.&nbsp;<a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia" target="_blank">www.greenpeace.org/eastasia</a></p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/ll63BR-m7PY" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Mon, 02 Nov 2015 14:30:00 +0100climate & energyTom Baxterhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/climate-energy/2015/Greenpeace-Response-to-China-France-Joint-Statement-on-Climate-Change/bbcf9433-e2cd-4db1-a01f-ed3dacdf127ahttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/H_JUQ8_i7G0/Greenpeace – 3200 acres of forest illegally felled in Sichuan World Heritage SiteBeijing, October 21 2015 – A Greenpeace East Asia investigation has discovered that nearly 3200 acres of natural forest, equivalent to 1814 football (soccer) pitches, in the Sichuan Giant Panda Sanctuaries have been illegally felled. Illegal logging in this UNESCO World Heritage site is a direct threat to endangered plant and animal species, including the Giant Panda.<div dir="ltr"><p></p><p align="left">“The extent of illegal logging in this precious area is shocking. These findings seriously undermine the Chinese government’s efforts to preserve its and the world’s natural heritage,” said Pan Wenjing,&nbsp;Deputy Head of Forest &amp; Ocean Unit, Greenpeace East Asia. “Greenpeace calls on national and local governments to put a stop to the destruction.”</p><p></p><p align="left">The findings from this two-year long investigation are based on remote sensing, field surveys and spatial analysis carried out on the areas surrounding the Fengtongzhai National Nature Reserve in Ya’an, Sichuan, part of an important Giant Panda migratory corridor and home to many rare plant and animal species.</p><p></p><p align="left">Despite regulations put into force in 1998 forbidding the felling of natural forests for profit, local&nbsp;businesses and authorities have been exploiting a loophole in the ‘Technical Regulations on Reconstruction of Low-function Forest’&nbsp;which allows them to replace ‘low yield’ natural forest with profitable forest plantations, under the guise of ‘forest regeneration’. Authorities tackled this issue with a further ban in 2012, but Greenpeace East Asia’s investigation shows that this has been ineffective.</p><p></p><p align="left">If this loophole is not closed, a third of China’s natural forest will remain at risk of deforestation even after the nationwide extension of the Natural Forest Protection Programme in 2017.</p><p></p><p align="left">The exploitation of the ‘low yield forest regeneration’ loophole in Sichuan is far from an isolated case. Previous Greenpeace East Asia investigations have uncovered similar activities in Yunnan (2013) and Zhejiang (2014) provinces.</p><p></p><p align="left">“In terms of forest conservation, the most pressing and most serious problem facing China right now is deforestation of natural forest in the name of improving low-yield timber forest”, says Zhou Lijiang, deputy chief engineer at the Sichuan Province Forestry Investigation and Planning Institute and key forestry regulations advisor.</p><p></p><p align="left">Greenpeace calls on the Chinese government to stop this illegal deforestation and strengthen the protection of this valuable UNESCO World Heritage site. Crucially, the loophole&nbsp;that allows ‘low yield’ natural forest to be felled and turned into commercial plantations must be closed.</p><p></p><p align="left"><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Images</span></strong></p><p></p><p><a href="http://photo.greenpeace.org/collection/27MZIFJ6YE1RH" target="_blank">http://photo.greenpeace.org/collection/27MZIFJ6YE1RH</a></p><p></p><p><strong><span style="text-decoration: underline;">Media contact</span></strong></p><p></p><p align="left">Tom Baxter,</p><p></p><p align="left">International Communications Officer, Greenpeace East Asia,</p><p></p><p align="left">email:&nbsp;<a href="mailto:tom.baxter@greenpeace.org" target="_blank">tom.baxter@greenpeace.org</a></p><p></p><p align="left">phone: +86 188 1134 4861</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace International Press Desk</p><p></p><p><a href="mailto:pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org" target="_blank">pressdesk.int@greenpeace.org</a>,</p><p></p><p>phone:&nbsp;<a href="tel:%2B31%20%280%29%2020%20718%202470" target="_blank">+31 (0) 20 718 2470</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;(available 24 hours)</p><p></p><p align="left">Greenpeace stands for positive change through action to defend the natural world and promote peace. We are a non-profit organisation with a presence in 40 countries. To maintain its independence, Greenpeace does not accept donations from governments or corporations but relies on contributions from individual supporters and foundation grants.<a href="http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia" target="_blank">www.greenpeace.org/eastasia</a></p><p></p><p align="left">&nbsp;</p><p></p></div><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/H_JUQ8_i7G0" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Wed, 21 Oct 2015 02:52:00 +0200forestsamcgurkhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/forests/2015/illegal-logging-sichuan/bc46bd5b-9500-44b1-8c37-4dc89a9b0ac4http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/fxxMuHRHrTY/Greenpeace discovers hazardous chemicals in remote mountain areas on three continents Zurich, 8 August 2015 – Persistent and Hazardous chemicals used in the production of outdoor gear have left their mark in even the most remote and seemingly untouched places on Earth, a Greenpeace Germany report released today has found.<p>As part of the report, entitled "Footprints in the snow - Hazardous PFCs in remote locations around the globe", eight Greenpeace teams led expeditions to investigate remote mountain ranges and lakes on three continents. Snow and water samples were taken in Chile, China, Italy, three Nordic countries, Russia, Slovakia, Switzerland and Turkey, and analysed for environmentally hazardous per- and poly-fluorinated chemicals (PFCs).</p><p></p><p>”We found traces of PFCs in snow samples from all of the sites that Greenpeace teams visited,” said Mirjam Kopp, Greenpeace Switzerland toxics campaigner. “It is deeply concerning to see that these persistent and hazardous chemicals have already reached the most pristine and remote corners of the world.”</p><p></p><p>The highest concentrations were found in samples from the Alps (Switzerland), the High Tatras (Slovakia) and the Apennines (Italy). The levels found are comparable to other studies that analysed surface snow in the Tibetan mountains and Antarctica.&nbsp;</p><p></p><p>PFCs are used in many industrial processes and consumer products. The outdoor industry in particular is an important user, since it applies PFCs to make products waterproof and dirt-repellent. Once released into the environment, PFCs are broken down only very slowly; they remain in the environment for many years and are dispersed across the entire planet. Some PFCs cause harm to reproduction, promote the growth of tumours and affect the hormone system.&nbsp;</p><p></p><p>Most of the samples also contained so-called short-chain PFCs - advertised by the industry as harmless – and increasingly used by outdoor brands instead of long-chain PFCs. &nbsp;</p><p></p><p>As this report demonstrates, volatile PFCs such as the ones currently used by outdoor brands are being transported and deposited even in remote mountainous regions around the world. The outdoor sector uses images of beautiful mountain landscapes, majestic forests, freshly fallen snow and clean rivers to convey the idea of freedom and love of nature. These positive images are heavily promoted by manufacturers of all-weather clothing and have brought strong double-digit growth in recent years.&nbsp;</p><p></p><p>”It is ironic to think that companies who depend on nature for their business willingly release dangerous chemicals into the environment,” said Mirjam Kopp, toxics campaigner. “Outdoor companies must take leadership for a better environment by making a genuine and credible commitment to stop using hazardous chemicals. They need to set short-term deadlines for completely eliminating the entire group of PFCs in production processes.”</p><p></p><p>Some brands that also produce outdoor clothing, such as Puma and Adidas, have already adopted ambitious elimination targets for PFCs. Some smaller outdoor companies, such as Fjällräven, Paramo, Pyua, Rotauf, and R'ADYS, already have entire collections of functional weatherproof clothing that are PFC-free. In contrast, leading outdoor companies such as The North Face, Columbia, Patagonia, Salewa and Mammut have shown little sense of responsibility when it comes to eliminating hazardous chemicals such as PFCs. &nbsp;</p><p></p><p>Nature lovers, outdoor and wilderness enthusiasts such as climbers, skiers and walkers, city dwellers and families – anyone who cares about the future of our wild places and our own health and environment – can join the movement on detox-outdoor.org asking the outdoor sector to get rid of hazardous chemicals. Together, outdoor lovers can challenge their favourite brands to become Detox Champions and stop the spread of PFCs across the planet.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/fxxMuHRHrTY" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Tue, 08 Sep 2015 06:33:00 +0200toxicsAnna McGurk http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/toxics/2015/Hazardous-chemicals-nature/72e597a0-0435-47b7-9a29-ae9ef032e9f5http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/Xd8gssn8D8A/Tianjin blast update: hazardous chemicals in coastal cities and results of second field testing Beijing, 21 August 2015-this media update contains two important findings:<p></p> <p></p>1. Research results on the locations of hazardous chemicals warehouses in four other major ports; Shanghai, Ningbo, Guangzhou and Qingdao.<p></p>2. Results from Greenpeace East Asia’s Rapid Response Team’s latest cyanide testing.<p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>1. &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Hazardous chemicals warehouses in Shanghai, Ningbo, Guangzhou and Qingda</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>1. Using Remote Sensing and GIS spatial analysis, Greenpeace East Asia investigated the locations of hazardous chemical storage facilities in China’s four largest ports; Shanghai, Ningbo, Guangzhou and Qingdao. Findings show that all four ports contain hazardous chemical facilities whose location violates regulations stipulating a safety distance of 1000m from residential compounds, public buildings and public transportation facilities.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>“The results of this research show that the tragedy which is unfolding in Tianjin could happen anywhere. Negligence and an alarming lack of enforcement of the regulations are widespread. Tianjin must be a wake up call for the authorities”, said Greenpeace East Asia Toxics Campaigner, Wu Yixiu.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>Shanghai</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>Shanghai Gangcheng Hazardous Goods Logistics Company Ltd.</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Shanghai, Pudong, Waigao Bridge, 6555 Zhangyang Beilu</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Established 20 May 1999, its principal business is the import and export, loading and unloading, storage and transportation of hazardous chemicals. Shanghai Gangcheng Hazardous Goods Logistics Company Ltd. is invested in by Shanghai Port Group Logistics Company Ltd., Shanghai Port Group (Hong Kong) Company Ltd., Shanghai Hongchao Hailu United Transportation Company Ltd., and Shanghai Gangcheng Collective Investments Company Ltd., who together form Shanghai-Hong Kong Investments Co. Ltd.</span></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>The facility occupies a total area of 55,300m</span><span>2</span><span>.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><em>Within 1000m of the facility there is a high school, elderly care home, a subway line and station, a long distance public transport hub and a large residential compound.</em></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>Shanghai Pudong Hongliang Hazardous Goods Storage Company Ltd.</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Shanghai, Pudong, 3999 Shenjiang Road</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>The facility occupies a total area of over 60,000m</span><span>2</span><span>.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>The company’s website states that this storage facility is no longer in use and that the company has moved to a new location named Haisheng Modern Logistics Park. However, information on the new warehouse could not be found online. Moreover, an analysis of time-series remote sensing images shows that the original warehouse still exists and that there has been consistent activity around the warehouse.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><em>If the warehouse is still in use it is in direct violation of the distance regulations. Located within 1000m of the warehouse is the Pudong New District Committee Party School, the Pudong New District Socialism School, Zhangjiang District Government Services Center, Zhangjiang High-tech Park and the Jinqiao Center Elementary School, as well as a number of residential districts.</em></p><p></p><p><span><br /></span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>Ningbo</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Ningbo Anda Hazardous Chemicals International Logistics Company Ltd. (NBAD)</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Ningbo, Beilun District, 8 Suanshan Anda Road</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>NBAD is a major importer and exporter of dangerous chemicals containers.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>The storage facility occupies a total area of 25,333m</span><span>2</span><span>, with an area of 12,000m</span><span>2</span><span> occupied by hazardous chemicals shipping containers. Yearly transit capacity can reach 250,000 tons.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>The facility is permitted to handle hazardous chemical types 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8 and 9 (see </span><a href="http://www.binhai.gov.cn/Article/ShowArticle.asp?ArticleID=518048"><span>here</span></a><span> for information on hazardous chemical types).</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><em>There is a distance of only 300m between the NBAD facility and the Beilun District drinking water reservoir. Within 1000m of the facility there are a number of residential areas and a kindergarten.</em></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>&nbsp;</span></p><p></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>Guangzhou</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>Eastern Port Logistics (Guangzhou Company Ltd.), Huangpu Hazardous Goods Warehouse</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Guangzhou, Huangpu District Geqiang Road storage tank area.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Established in 2002, the storage containers occupy a total area of 3000m</span><span>2</span><span>.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>The company is permitted to store hazardous chemical types 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, 3.1, 3.2, 3.3, 4.1, 6.1, and 8.1. (see </span><a href="http://www.binhai.gov.cn/Article/ShowArticle.asp?ArticleID=518048"><span>here</span></a><span> for information on hazardous chemical types).</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><em>There is only 100m distance between the Geqiang Road storage tank area and national highway G107. Within 1000m of the storage facility there is a large residential compound, kindergarten, elementary school and a high school.</em></p><p></p><p align="left">&nbsp;</p><p></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>Qingdao</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>Qingdao Furuisen Hazardous Goods Warehouse</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Qingdao, Huangdao District, S328</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Qingdao Furuisen Hazardous Goods Warehouse was established in 2009 is licensed by the Shandong Administration of Work and Safety to handle and distribute hazardous chemicals, including acute toxicity chemicals.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>It occupies a total area of 7000m</span><span>2</span><span>.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><em>Within 1000m of the facility there are large residential areas, a port rail road and the S328 provincial highway.</em></p><p></p><p><em></em></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>2. Cyanide testing results</strong></p><p></p><p><em><span id="docs-internal-guid-e15485d0-4fd4-5513-59f0-265105b58cb9"><span>On Thursday 20 August, Greenpeace East Asia’s Tianjin Rapid Response Team (RRTeam) tested open sources of water for traces of sodium cyanide in residential areas 5km, 3km and 1km from the blast site, as well as at the Haihe River bank where large quantities of dead fish were recently found. In total, water at seven sites was tested.</span></span>&nbsp;<br /></em></p><p></p><p><em>&nbsp;</em></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>Sampling Equipment</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Reagent 1- Japanese Brand; Model: WAK-CN; &nbsp;testing range: under 0.02- 2mg/L</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Reagent 2: German brand; Model: VisocolorECO Cyanid; testing range 0.01-0.20mg/L</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span><span id="docs-internal-guid-bf2cbd18-4fd8-5ccb-4173-584dac111769"><br /><strong>Test Results Summary</strong></span></span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span><span><strong></strong></span></span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span><span><strong>&nbsp;</strong></span></span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>Greenpeace’s Demands</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>“This tragic incident, which has cost the lives of 116 citizens, has exposed major loopholes in this country’s regulation of &nbsp;hazardous chemicals and should be a wake up call for authorities”, said Greenpeace East Asia Toxics Campaigner, Wu Yixiu. </span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>A repeat of this kind of incident can only be avoided by ensuring management of hazardous chemicals is drastically improved and safety regulations strictly enforced. GPEA calls on the authorities to ensure: </span></p><p></p><ol><p></p><li dir="ltr"><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Regulations clearly state a safe distance between hazardous chemical storage warehouses and residential areas and ensure that this is strictly enforced.</span></p><p></p></li><p></p><li dir="ltr"><span>Information on hazardous chemicals storage is made fully available to the public, in particular to those who live in close to such storage facilities.</span></li><p></p></ol><p></p><p><span>&nbsp;</span></p><p></p><p align="left">&nbsp;</p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/Xd8gssn8D8A" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Fri, 21 Aug 2015 05:22:00 +0200toxicsamcgurkhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/toxics/2015/Tianjin-blast-update-August-21/cdae4309-70b7-4edd-9277-54418f40238ehttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/vKfwG3HgeTY/Tianjin blast update: satellite images of blast site Beijing, August 20 2015- The distance between the Ruihai Logistics Company’s hazardous chemicals warehouse and the nearest residential area has become a key area of interest for journalists and concerned citizens. Whilst regulations stipulate that the distance between such developments should be at least 1000m, the Ruihai warehouse was located just 310m from the nearest residential area, the Vanke Qingshui Harbour residential compound, and within 500m and 620m of two other residential compounds.<p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Through satellite imagery dating from June 2008, Greenpeace East Asia has established that construction of the residential areas began before the warehouse began storing hazardous chemicals, meaning that the Ruihai Logistics Company was in direct violation of the relevant regulations.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>&nbsp;&nbsp;</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>20 June 2008</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>The warehouse area belonged to Jiantong United and Ailande Supplies Ltd.. These two companies were using the warehouse. At this time construction of the three residential compounds Qihang Gardens , Vanke Qingshui Harbour and Mediatek Fifth Street had not yet begun.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr">&nbsp;</p><p></p><p><span>&nbsp;</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>18 November 2009</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Part of the warehouse was rented to Zhongchu Company, the other part was rented to Zhonglian Gongsi. At this time the warehouse still did not contain hazardous chemicals. Construction of Qihang Gardens began.</span></p><p></p><p><span>&nbsp;&nbsp;</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>19 May 2011</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr">&nbsp;Part of the warehouse was still used by Zhongchu Company. Construction of Vanke Qingshui Harbour began. The construction of Qihang Gardens was complete and the apartments were ready for sale (they went on the market in July 2011).</p><p></p><p dir="ltr"></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>26 September 2013</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>At the end of 2012 Ruihai Logistics Company began using the warehouse. Shortly after they began to store hazardous chemicals in the warehouse, ignoring the stipulated safety distance of 1km. By this time part of the Vanke Qingshui Harbour compound had already been constructed and people were already living in Qihang Gardens. Construction on Mediatek Fifth Street began.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr">&nbsp;</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>5 April 2014</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span id="docs-internal-guid-3162e6ea-4b93-8388-5263-9aa4ad6122d2"><span>Ruihai Logistics Company continued to use the warehouse to store hazardous chemicals. Construction of the Vanke Qingshui Harbour compound had been completed and apartments were occupied.</span></span>&nbsp;</p><p></p><p><span>&nbsp;&nbsp;</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>24 November 2014</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span id="docs-internal-guid-3162e6ea-4b95-663b-3328-bf7b02f6ec52"><span>Part of Mediatek Fifth Street was completed and for sale. </span><span>The third phase of the Vanke complex, currently under construction, became available for presale on June 26. The residences were due to be completed for handover in August 2016.</span></span></p><p></p><p><span>&nbsp;</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>13 August 2015</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Mediatek Fifth street mostly completed and for sale. </span><span>The third phase of the Vanke complex, currently under construction, became available for presale on June 26. The residences were due to be completed for handover in August 2016.</span></p><p></p><p><span>&nbsp;</span></p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/vKfwG3HgeTY" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Thu, 20 Aug 2015 13:52:00 +0200toxicsamcgurkhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/toxics/2015/Tianjin-blast-update-satellite-images-of-blast-site-/d04d6913-12d6-4a36-a076-a50118febbafhttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/bE_sAvTXhQw/Tianjin blast update: Greenpeace East Asia investigates factories in Tianjin portBeijing, August 18 2015- Based on media reports and Tianjin port authority records, Greenpeace East Asia has discovered that other than the Ruihai Logistics Company, two other hazardous chemical facilities, containing up to seven types of chemicals, were present in the blast zone. Both are affiliated to the state-owned Sinochem Corporation.<p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Greenpeace East Asia used remote sensing and</span><span> spatial analysis </span><span>to investigate the location of these sites. It found that both are in violation of Article 19 of the </span><a href="http://www.cirs-reach.com/China_Chemical_Regulation/Regulations_on_safe_management_on_hazardous_chemicals_China_2011.pdf"><span>‘Regulations on the Safe Management of Hazardous Chemicals in China’</span></a><span>, which stipulate that hazardous chemical facilities must be located at least 1000m from public places, transportation networks and residential areas. (see below)</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>Sinochem Tianjin Binhai Logistics Company Ltd.</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Established in 1965, it is a major distribution and transit center for hazardous chemicals. It is granted permission to handle hazardous chemicals by the Tianjin Maritime Bureau.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>In total the company’s storage facilities cover an area of 130,000m</span><span>2</span><span>.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><em><strong>Within 1000m of the storage facility there is a large residential area, a kindergarten, elementary school, high school and other public areas.</strong></em></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>Tianjin Port Sinochem Hazardous Goods Logistics Company Ltd.</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Established in the Tianjin port area in November 2011. It is a shareholder in Sinochem Tianjin Binhai Logistics Company Ltd. It is a large distributor of hazardous materials, with large amounts of international freight.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>No information on size of the facility.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><em><strong>It is located less than 200m away from a major highway.</strong></em></p><p></p><p><span>&nbsp;<br /></span></p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/bE_sAvTXhQw" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Tue, 18 Aug 2015 12:24:00 +0200toxicsamcgurkhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/toxics/2015/Tianjin-blast-update-Greenpeace-East-Asia-investigates-factories-in-Tianjin-port/4d22eb3c-5dd2-4caf-a360-7a6b94b3c9a4http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/WDn1-l551CU/Tianjin blast update: Comments on current hazardous chemicals policies and their implementation“The horrific Tianjin explosion on Wednesday night and the worrying scenes we have witnessed over the last five days are just the tip of the iceberg. What lies beneath the surface is years of negligence in regards to hazardous chemicals policies and their implementation.” said Toxics Campaigner for Greenpeace East Asia, Wu Yixiu.<p>&nbsp;In December 2011 the Chinese government introduced new and strict regulations on the storage, transportation, production and import/export of hazardous chemicals (<a href="http://www.cirs-reach.com/China_Chemical_Regulation/Regulations_on_safe_management_on_hazardous_chemicals_China_2011.pdf">‘Regulations on the Safe Management of Hazardous Chemicals in China’</a>).</p><p></p><p>In regards to the Tianjin blast, Greenpeace East Asia notes three major problems with the current regulations and their implementation:</p><p></p><ol><p></p><li>The storage and transportation of the dangerous chemicals in Ruihai Logistics Company warehouse should have been closely monitored and supervised by at least four governmental bodies, namely the port authorities, the Ministry of Transport, the Ministry of Public Security, and the State Administration of Work Safety. It is evident however, that supervision has been fragmented and inefficient.</li><p></p><li>The laws regarding the distance between chemical storage facilities and residential areas are severely insufficient, with no precise distance specified in the regulations. The distance between the Ruihai Logistics Company warehouse and the nearest residential area was just 560m.</li><p></p><li>Given that local authorities are unable to identify the exact chemical names and quantities, it seems questionable that the Ruihai Logistics Company was following the proper measures for reporting and recording of dangerous chemicals stipulated by the current regulations.</li><p></p></ol><p></p><p>In the first half of 2015, over 13 chemical industry explosion accidents have occurred. The severity of the Tianjin explosion should be a wake-up call for the government. Loopholes must be closed, and regulations must be implemented strictly and effectively. If not, we will continue to see these kinds of dangerous accidents.</p><p></p><p><strong>Wind and Pollution Forecast</strong></p><p></p><p>According to NOAA-HYSPLIT forecasts, wind direction over the 24 hour period from 1400 August 17, 2015 will remain north or north east. On the condition that highest wind strength remains at force 2, the following predictions can be made:</p><p></p><ol><p></p><li>Air pollution will not spread to southern and western areas.</li><p></p><li>Air pollution will not spread at a high speed.</li><p></p></ol><p></p><p>The HYSPLIT model also calculates the different possibilities of vertical airflow, meaning that there is a possibility for air pollutants to diffuse into higher levels of the atmosphere, or that they could maintain their comparatively low atmospheric position.</p><p></p><p>About the NOAA-HYSPLIT model: this model uses different meteorological and atmospheric data to calculate wind direction. The different colours in the image below indicate different times at which the calculations were begun. The Meters AGL chart indicates the vertical movement of air.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p></p><p>&nbsp;</p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/WDn1-l551CU" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Mon, 17 Aug 2015 10:39:00 +0200toxicsamcgurkhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/toxics/2015/Tianjin-Blast-Update-Comments-on-current-hazardous-chemicals-policies-and-their-implementation/abfa9513-bd72-4b52-a9e6-d177c1546f07http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/cmAL8bJ3pzQ/Tianjin blast update: authorities evacuate area surrounding blast siteBeijing, 15 August 2015 - This morning authorities confirmed the presence of sodium cyanide and a number of other chemicals within 1km of the blast site and have established a 3km evacuation zone. However, the precise make-up of the cocktail of chemicals involved and in what quantities remains unknown. <p><strong>The Evacuation Zone: </strong></p><p></p><p>Residents within the 3km safety zone have been evacuated due to the presence of hazardous chemicals. However, seeing as the precise make-up of the “cocktail of chemicals” which have been released in the blast remains unclear, and that wind risks spreading hazardous pollutants to other areas of the city, a 5km evacuation zone could ensure safety far more effectively.</p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>Greenpeace strongly advises relevant authorities to provide residents with protective gear, relevant information and to pay close attention to ongoing developments at the blast site and the wind direction and its potential influence outside of the 3km evacuation zone.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span></span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>Predictions on Wind Direction</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><span>According to NOAA-HYSPLIT the wind direction over the next 24 hours will remain north to north easterly. At around 0400 tomorrow the wind may shift to an easterly direction. The spread of hazardous chemicals will have no impact on southern and western areas and will not spread very rapidly.</span></p><p></p><p dir="ltr">&nbsp;</p><p></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p></p><p dir="ltr"><strong>Identifying Hazardous Chemicals</strong></p><p></p><p dir="ltr">Of particular concern is the type, quantities and concentrations of chemicals which were released during the blast. Of these, sodium cyanide (NaCN) is of particular danger to human health. Greenpeace urges the relevant authorities to make that information public as early as possible. Measures to mitigate health and environmental damage should be taken accordingly.</p><p></p><div class="yj6qo ajU"><p></p><div id=":13q" class="ajR" data-tooltip="Show trimmed content"><img class="ajT" src="https://ssl.gstatic.com/ui/v1/icons/mail/images/cleardot.gif" alt="" /></div><p></p></div><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/cmAL8bJ3pzQ" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Mon, 17 Aug 2015 10:15:00 +0200toxicsamcgurkhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/toxics/2015/Tianjin-blast-update-authorities-evacuate-area-surrounding-blast-site/adf483b5-d562-4c63-a941-aa55b4e3d5b8http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/37F6jFVbBDo/BREAKING - Standard Chartered ditches giant coal mine threatening Great Barrier ReefHong Kong, 11 Aug 2015 - Standard Chartered has announced yesterday that it is pulling out of one of the world’s most controversial coal developments following an international campaign by Greenpeace East Asia and others environmental groups.<p>The prominent bank has been the leading financial advisor to the companies planning to dig up Australia’s largest coal mine. A vast coalition of environmental campaigners has warned the development could threaten the Great Barrier Reef and set off a carbon time bomb.</p><p></p><p>Only last week, Greenpeace East Asia has protested in over 100 Standard Chartered branches &nbsp;throughout Hong Kong by putting up designed stickers on ATM machines, demanding the bank to ‘Choose Coral NOT Coal’, and Greenpeace UK &nbsp;executive director John Sauven also wrote to the bank’s bosses asking them to come clean about their current role. Yesterday, a Standard Chartered spokesperson told Greenpeace UK that they will no longer provide financial advice to the project.&nbsp;</p><p></p><p>Greenpeace East Asia has welcomed the decision by Standard Chartered to end their involvement with the Carmichael coal mine.</p><p></p><p>"This is a victory for anyone who cares about the future of both the Great Barrier Reef and the world’s efforts to tackle climate change,” said Elsa Lee, Senior Business Advisor of Greenpeace East Asia. “Getting anywhere near this controversial project is now a massive reputational risk even for some of the world’s most powerful banks. The Australian government should now take notice and rethink their support for one of the most environmentally destructive fossil fuel developments in the world.”</p><p></p><p>Standard Chartered’s move is the third blow to the Carmichael mine in just a few days. Last week, the federal court of Australia overturned the government approval for the mine. Just hours later, the Commonwealth Bank of Australia announced it was walking away from the venture.&nbsp;</p><p></p><p>Carmichael&nbsp;would be Australia’s largest coal mine and one of the largest in the world. On the doorstep of the Great Barrier Reef, it would require massive seafloor dredging and port expansion, resulting in hundreds more coal ships sailing through Reef waters. At 28,000 hectares, it would also produce 121 million tonnes of carbon dioxide emissions yearly at maximum production driving climate change - the greatest threat to the Reef.</p><p></p><p><strong>&nbsp;</strong></p><p></p><p><strong>Media Contacts</strong></p><p></p><p>Elsa Lee, Greenpeace Senior Business Advisor</p><p></p><p>Email：<a href="mailto:else.lee@greenpeace.org" target="_blank">else.lee@greenpeace.org</a></p><p></p><p><br />Josephine Ng, Greenpeace Communications Team Leader</p><p></p><p>Email：<a href="mailto:ray.yeung@greenpeace.org" target="_blank">jng@greenpeace.org</a>&nbsp;</p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/37F6jFVbBDo" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Tue, 11 Aug 2015 07:00:00 +0200oceansJosephine Nghttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/oceans/2015/BREAKING---Standard-Chartered-ditches-giant-coal-mine-threatening-Great-Barrier-Reef/676a9610-2472-48e0-9f5e-2ed7b695d7dahttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/B5MKunRLVqs/Greenpeace: Jiangsu a potential leader of China’s ‘energy revolution’Beijing, 15 July, 2015 – Greenpeace East Asia (GPEA) research on Jiangsu Province’s renewables capability has found that with its natural resources and current electricity grid infrastructure, the province is capable of more than triple its current targets. Moreover, research shows that with technological upgrades to the network, reaching more ambitious renewable targets could be achieved at a 50% lower cost than through network expansion. GPEA calls on the Jiangsu provincial government and other eastern provinces to take note of these important findings and pursue a more ambitious and cost effective renewables target while reducing coal power generation. Following this path, Jiangsu can become a leader in China’s energy revolution.<p style="text-align: left;" align="right">&nbsp;“Last month China pledged to the UN to attain 20% of its energy from renewables by 2030. This pledge will be achieved, or quite possibly surpassed, by the efforts of every province. And yet Jiangsu, a critical piece in the jigsaw, is under promising,” said GPEA Climate and Energy Senior Campaigner Yuan Ying.</p><p></p><p>Jiangsu currently supplies the majority of its energy from coal. As a result it has some of the worst air quality in China.<a title="" name="_ftnref1" href="file:///C:/Users/Tom%20Baxter/Documents/July/%E6%B1%9F%E8%8B%8F/PR/JS%20renewables%20PR_FINAL_ii.docx#_ftn1">[1]</a> However, current plans to increase renewable energy usage by 10GW for both wind and solar would result in just 5% of total energy coming from renewables by 2020.</p><p></p><p>GPEA’s research into the renewables potential and grid capacity of Jiangsu Province used a computerised model of the Jiangsu power grid, on which a more ambitious renewables energy plan of 30GW of wind, 30GW of solar and 3GW of biomass power, more than triple current targets, was simulated. The research was carried out in conjunction with the Chinese Renewable Energy Industry Association, German engineering consultancy Energynautics, and the Jiangsu Electric Power Company’s Research Institute.</p><p></p><p>Findings showed that if Jiangsu were to introduce smart grid measures such as Dynamic Line Rating – a technology which cools power lines and increases efficiency – the province could easily integrate 30GW of wind and 30GW solar energy. It could then meet a 2020 renewables target of 14%. Moreover, at 3.1&nbsp;billion rmb, the cost of such smart grid upgrades are almost 50% cheaper than the 6.7 billion rmb which would be required to expand the current network to meet this target.</p><p></p><p>“With smart grid measures Jiangsu, together with other eastern provinces, could become one of the pioneers of China’s energy revolution,” said Yuan Ying.</p><p></p><p>GPEA calls on the Jiangsu government to implement these cost effective improvements to the current network and enhance the ambition of its renewable energy targets. Through such measures Jiangsu and provinces with similar conditions have enormous potential to significantly improve their air pollution problems and to become driving forces of China’s clean energy future.</p><p></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p></p><p><strong>Media Contact:</strong><strong>&nbsp;</strong></p><p></p><p>Tom Baxter</p><p></p><p>International Communications Officer</p><p></p><p>Email: <a href="mailto:tom.baxter@greenpeace.org">tom.baxter@greenpeace.org</a></p><p></p><p align="left">Phone: +86 <a href="tel:18811344861" target="_blank">188 1134 4861</a></p><p></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p></p><p>&nbsp;</p><p></p><div><br clear="all" /><hr align="left" size="1" width="33%" /><p></p><div id="ftn1"><p></p><p><a title="" name="_ftn1" href="file:///C:/Users/Tom%20Baxter/Documents/July/%E6%B1%9F%E8%8B%8F/PR/JS%20renewables%20PR_FINAL_ii.docx#_ftnref1">[1]</a> http://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/climate-energy/2015/Hebei-Jiangsu-exceeding-emissions-cap/</p><p></p></div><p></p></div><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/B5MKunRLVqs" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Wed, 15 Jul 2015 10:05:00 +0200climate & energytbaxterhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/climate-energy/2015/Greenpeace-Jiangsu-a-potential-leader-of-Chinas-energy-revolution/c05a5adf-b5a7-4a07-8455-ec00a41e17cbhttp://feedproxy.google.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~3/nUZyYHsGv28/China submits post-2020 climate targetsParis/Beijing, 30 June, 2015 – China submitted a carbon intensity reduction target of 60-65% by 2030, based on 2005 levels, to the UN as part of its climate plan (INDC), according to media reports. The announcement came as Chinese premier Li Keqiang was in Paris for an official visit to France – the presidency of this year’s climate summit.<p>“China has only ever been on defence when it comes to climate change, but today’s announcement is the first step for a more active role. For success in Paris, however, all players – including China and the EU – need to up their game,” said Li Shuo, climate analyst for Greenpeace China.</p><p></p><p>With China’s announcement, the world’s top polluters – China, the US and the EU – have now all tabled their climate plans ahead of the global climate conference taking place in Paris at the end of the year.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p><p></p><p>“Today’s pledge must be seen as only the starting point for much more ambitious action. It does not fully reflect the significant energy transition that is already taking place in China. Given the dramatic fall in coal consumption, robust renewable energy uptake, and the urgent need to address air pollution, we believe the country can go well beyond what it has proposed today,” added Li Shuo.</p><p></p><p>China's current carbon intensity target requires a reduction of CO2 emissions per unit of GDP by 40-45% by 2020, based on 2005 levels. Assuming China delivers 45% by 2020, a 65% and 60% carbon intensity reduction will mean 4.4% and 3.1% annual carbon intensity decrease respectively between 2020 and 2030. Achieving 45% carbon intensity reduction by 2020 would mean annual carbon intensity reduction of 3.9%.</p><p></p><p>&nbsp;<strong>Media Contacts:</strong></p><p></p><p>Li Shuo (currently in Europe),Climate &amp; Energy Policy Officer, Greenpeace East Asia<br />Email: li.shuo@greenpeace.org phone: +49 151-6194-5236</p><p></p><p>Tina Loeffelbein, Political Communications Lead, International Climate Politics, Greenpeace Germany<br />Email: tina.loeffelbein@greenpeace.org, phone:+49 151 167 209 15</p><p></p><p>Tom Baxter(based in Beijing), International Communications Officer, Greenpeace East Asia <br />Email: tom.baxter@greenpeace.org, phone:+86 188-1134-4861</p><p></p><p>Romina Sanfourche, PR Officer, Greenpeace France<br />Email: romina.sanfourche@greenpeace.org, phone: +33 6 46 90 21 03</p><img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/gpea/pressreleases/~4/nUZyYHsGv28" height="1" width="1" alt=""/>Tue, 30 Jun 2015 13:27:00 +0200climate & energyamcgurkhttp://www.greenpeace.org/eastasia/press/releases/climate-energy/2015/China-submits-post-2020-climate-targets/